Petitioner sought mandamus to make officials act against an unauthorised industrial factory and implement a panchayat order. Since the factory's earlier challenge had already been quashed with liberty to initiate fresh action per procedure, this Court passed no order and merely disposed of the petition.
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.
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.03.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
N.Rajamanickam
.. Petitioner
vs
Page 1 of 7
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1 to 8 official respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 15.8.2014, 6.11.2019 and 24.4.2023 and consequently direct the official respondents 1 to 6 to take an action against the 10th respondent unauthorised established Industrial Factory at S.F.Nos.262/1, 2, 263/1B2, 2B2 and 264/2A3, 2B, Anupatti Village, Palladam Taluk, Tiruppur District and accordingly implement the order of the 8th respondent dated 28.4.2023.
Page 2 of 7
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
For the Petitioner : Mr.K.Myilsamy For the Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for respondents 1, 3 to 6 : Mr.P.Nethaji for respondent No.8 : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh for respondent No.9 : Mr.K.V.Babu for respondent No.10
ORDER
(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.K.Myilsamy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1, 3 to 6; Mr.P.Nethaji, learned counsel for respondent No.8; Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, learned counsel for respondent No.9; and, Mr.K.V.Babu, learned counsel for respondent No.10.
___________ Page 3 of 7_
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
2B2 and 264/2A3, 2B at Anupatti Village, Palladam Taluk.
___________ Page 4 of 7_
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
order as to costs.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 26.03.2024 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No bbr
To
___________ Page 5 of 7_
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
Page 6 of 7
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
bbr
W.P.No.2252 of 2024
26.03.2024
___________ Page 7 of 7_
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the authorities should be directed to act against the unauthorised industrial factory given that the notice against respondent No.10 was already quashed by a coordinate bench with liberty to a
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Rajamanickam
State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department
The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board
The Deputy Director, Local Planning Authority, Tirupur District
The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Tiruppur District
M/s.Kannappan Alloy & Steel Company P Ltd.
Sanjay V.Gangapurwala
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
