Police officers referred a mining representation dispute to a Revenue Divisional Officer peace committee meeting after villagers objected over groundwater pollution; the court held the direction was only to consider the representation, refused to keep the contempt pending, and closed the petition with observations.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
M/s.K.A.M.Mines and Minerals, Rep. by its Proprietor, A.Muthukumar,
No.1/74, Chettiyakadu Thagattor Village, Vadaranyam Taluk, Nagapattinam District. ... Petitioner/Petitioner
Vs.
1.Mr.Ashish Rawat, The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.
3.Mr.Murugesan, The Inspector of Police, Adirampattinam Police Station, Thanjavur, Thanjavur district. ... Contemnors/Respondents
1/6
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
PRAYER : Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court
Act, 1970, to punish the respondents herein for his willful disobedience of the
order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.29013 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023.
For Petitioner :Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents :Ms.M.Aasha Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O RDER
This petition has been filed to punish the respondent herein for her willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.29013 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023.
2.The facts in brief:
Writ petition in W.P.(MD).No.29013 of 2023 was filed by the petitioner herein seeking a direction to the respondent herein to consider the representation within the time stipulated by this Court. The representation was dated 09.11.2023. That was considered by this Court. Direction was issued to the respondent herein to consider the representation of the petitioner and obligation was imposed upon the petitioner to produce all the documents, which are
2/6
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
available with them. The respondent was further directed to summon the petitioner herein as well as the objectors and dispose the representation within a period of 14 days.
3.Complaining that the above said direction was not complied by the respondent herein, this contempt petition is filed. At the time of hearing the contempt petition, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) on behalf of the respondent herein submitted that enquiry was undertaken and during the course of enquiry, several Villagers made strong objection. In view of the above said issue, the respondent thought it fit to refer the issue to the Revenue Divisional Officer for resolving the same by conducting peace committee meeting. The recommendation is dated 11.07.2024.
4.On that ground, the learned Senior counsel for the appellant would submit that it is for the respondent to consider the representation and there is no meaning or purpose in referring the matter to the peace committee meeting. It has no relevance.
3/6
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
5.But, further reading of the report submitted by the respondent shows that several Villagers made objection stating that if the Silicon sand is taken, then there is every likelihood of sea water to enter into the Village and causing pollution to the ground water. On that ground only, the matter was referred to the peace committee meeting. If the petitioner is aggrieved over the above said recommendation, he can very well workout his remedy through appropriate proceedings or he can participate in the peace committee meeting and depending upon the outcome of the peace committee meeting, if so aggrieved, he can pursue the matter further.
6.But, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the matter
can be kept pending by this Court till the conclusion of the peace committee meeting. But, this request cannot be considered. Since only direction was issued to the respondent herein to consider the representation and pass orders, now, this Court cannot give direction to the respondent herein to proceed in a particular manner in this contempt proceedings. When the respondent though it fit to refer
the issue to the Revenue authorities for conducting peace committee meeting, the matter cannot be kept pending. So this request is rejected
4/6
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
7.Accordingly, this contempt petition stands closed by making the above
said observation.
11.07.2024
Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No TM
To
1.Mr.Ashish Rawat, The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.
2.Mr.Ravichandran, The Deputy superintendent of Police, O/o. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.
3.Mr.Murugesan, The Inspector of Police, Adirampattinam Police Station, Thanjavur, Thanjavur district.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
G.ILANGOVAN. J.
TM
Cont P(MD) No.1135 of 2024
11.07.2024
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the police respondents willfully disobeyed this Court's direction to consider the petitioner's representation and dispose of it within 14 days.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.K.A.M.Mines and Minerals, Rep. by its Proprietor, A.Muthukumar
Mr.Ashish Rawat, The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District
Mr.Ravichandran, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District
Mr.Murugesan, The Inspector of Police, Adirampattinam Police Station
G.ILANGOVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
