Disposed

C.Periyasamy v. the Deputy Director of Mining and Geology

Madras HC19 Mar 2024WP/7260/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, having won a mining lease auction, sought transport permits which were withheld due to an ongoing enquiry regarding excess quarrying. The enquiry resulted in a demand for seigniorage fee and penalty. Upon the petitioner's confirmation that he would withdraw his appeal against the penalty and pay the dues, the Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representatio

What did the court decide?

Mandamus issued directing respondents to consider petitioner's representation and issue transport permit within two weeks if found appropriate.

C.Periyasamy Vs the Deputy Director of Mining… — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

2024:MHC:1343

¶2

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 19.03.2024

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶7

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

C.Periyasamy

.... Petitioner

The Deputy Director of Mining and Geology, Office of the District Collector, Salem.

¶12

The District Collector, Salem.

¶13

The Sub Collector, Mettur.

¶14

.... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 09.03.2024 of the petitioner and forthwith issue transport permit to quarry rough stone in the lands of an extent of 1.00.0 hectares in Survey No.12, part 2, Jagadevapatti Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi, Senior Counsel for Mr.L.Palanimuthu

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.Veda Bhagath Singh Special Government Pleader

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

1/4

¶21

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

¶22

Mr.Veda Bhagath Singh, learned Special Government Pleader

¶23

accepts notice for the respondents and is armed with instructions to

¶24

enable final disposal of this Writ Petition, even at the stage of admission.

¶25

The petitioner claims to have been successful in a public auction conducted for lease of lands in S.No.12, Part 2, Jagadevampatti Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District ('land'/'land in question') for mining of rough stone, sized stone, chakkai and jelly and claims to have been carrying on leasing operations there.

¶26

While this is so, from 07.02.2022, the petitioner has not been issued with transport permits. Hence, he filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.20709 of 2022 praying for a mandamus for consideration of his representation for issuance of transport permit to quarry rough stone.

¶27

The stand of the respondents in that Writ Petition was that the petitioner had quarried in excess of the permitted limits and that enquiry was on-going in that regard.

¶28

This Court, by order dated 19.09.2022, disposed that Writ Petition directing the Sub-Collector, Mettur/R3 to complete the enquiry within a period of three weeks and pass appropriate orders.

¶29

The enquiry culminated in an order imposing seigniorage fee of

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

2/4

¶32

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

¶33

Rs.43,07,000/- and penalty of equal amount, totalling Rs.86,14,000/-. Though the petitioner has filed an appeal as against that order, learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner is ready to pay the amount and withdraw the appeal.

¶34

There is a discrepancy between the oral submission made as above and paragraph 9 of the affidavit, where the petitioner has indicated that the amount would be paid pending disposal of the appeal. When this is pointed out, additional affidavit dated 19.03.2024 is filed, where the petitioner confirms that he wishes to withdraw the appeal and will not contest the levy of Seigniorage fee and penalty. This is recorded.

¶35

In light of the above, mandamus is issued directing the respondents to take appropriate action on the representation of the petitioner dated 09.03.2024 and issue transport permit, if found appropriate, in accordance with law and all Rules and Regulations, within a period of two (2) weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

3/4

¶39

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

¶40

This Writ Petition is disposed as above. No costs.

¶41

Index:Yes/No Speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes sl

¶42

19.03.2024

¶43

¶44

The Deputy Director of Mining and Geology, Office of the District Collector, Salem.

¶45

The District Collector, Salem.

¶46

The Sub Collector, Mettur.

¶47

W.P.No.7260 of 2024

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

4/4

C.Periyasamy v. the Deputy Director of Mining and Geology

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Periyasamy v. the Deputy Director of Mining and Geology

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Ayyammal Vs the Secretary to Government

Raja Karthic (Member Ship No 427) Vs the Tamilnadu Film Directors Association

S.Imran Khan Vs Regional Passport Officer

Kannappan Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

Asath Satheik Vs the District Collector

R.Ramakrishnan Vs the Tashildar