A.Sornakumar Vs the State of Tamilnadu

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned G.O.(D)No.37, dated 15.03.2024 passed by the 1st respondent for granting permit of quarry lease to the 8th respondent in Survey No.70/1, Agalur Village, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District, quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to declare the subject land, two inscriptions and dimensional stones therein as ancient monuments within a time limit to be stipulated by this Honourable Court.

¶28

_______________ Page 2 of 8_

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.10766 of 2024

¶31

For Petitioner: Ms.U.Ramya for Mr.R. Bharath Kumar For Respondents: Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Govt. Pleader assisted by Mr.T.K.Saravanan Addl. Govt. Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 6 Mr.K.Srinivasamurthy Senior Panel Counsel for respondent No.7 Mr.Abishek Jenasenan for respondent No.8

¶32

ORDER

¶33

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶35

This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed by the petitioner espousing public cause that undertaking a quarrying operation within the prohibited distance of 100 metres of the habitation would adversely affect the health of the residents of the area. In addition, it is also submitted that it would also damage and

¶36

_______________ Page 3 of 8_

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.No.10766 of 2024

¶39

destroy nearby inscriptions, which are protected monuments.

¶40

Referring to the averments made in the petition and various photographs on record, it is stated that the quarrying operation, which the private respondent has been allowed to undertake, will create pollution and other health hazards. Therefore, the quarrying lease granted in favour of the private respondent may be directed to be cancelled.

¶41

Learned State counsel, referring to the averments made in the reply-affidavit, would submit that though technically speaking a quarry lease had to be granted so that the private respondent may be permitted to remove the big boulder by cutting into pieces and transport it to some other place, no quarrying activity, in the nature of digging, would be involved. All that is required to be done is to cut the big stone lying above earth into pieces and then to transport it.

¶42

It is further submitted by learned State Counsel that the

¶43

_______________ Page 4 of 8_

¶44

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

¶45

W.P.No.10766 of 2024

¶46

other submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the inscriptions are alleged to be protected monuments is factually incorrect. All those inscriptions, which are said to be situated nearby, are not so far notified as part of protected monuments under the provisions of the relevant Act.

¶47

Learned counsel for the private respondent would submit that the petition is not bona fide and, in fact, the petitioner wanted to extract money, which was not paid. Therefore, this petition has been filed.

¶48

We find that the private respondent has been granted permission by the State in the form of a quarry lease to facilitate removal of big stone lying above earth, which is proposed to be used for carving statue of Lord Mahavir. More than that, as clarified by learned State counsel and learned counsel for the private respondent, no other activity is required to be undertaken. If that be the factual position, we do not think that cutting of the stone and removal will involve health hazards to such an extent that it

¶49

_______________ Page 5 of 8_

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.No.10766 of 2024

¶52

should not be allowed to be undertaken. Further more, the inscriptions, which are alleged to protected monuments, have not so far been finally notified as such. But, at the same time, though proceedings were drawn earlier, it did not culminate in issuance of final notification. The State authorities and the private respondent shall ensure that in the process of cutting the stone and transportation, the inscriptions shall not be damaged.

¶53