Dismissed¶37

Karmegam v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC7 Feb 2025WP(MD)/3512/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(MD)No.3512 of 2025, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 07.02.2025, Justice V. Lakshminarayanan (single member). Petitioner Karmegam v. Tahsildar, Taluka Office, Melur and others. Dismissal of Article 226 certiorari challenge to penalty order dated 28.12.2024 (Na.Ka.No.4909/2024/R1) imposing Rs.16,000/- (Rs.200/- per tree) for cutting Usilai trees, without permission, on Government poramboke land on the banks of Marukal; act characterised as theft; objection based on violation of natural justice rejected; no order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petitions W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2498 & 2500 of 2025 closed. No precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

None - the writ petition was dismissed and the Tahsildar's penalty order was left undisturbed; no order as to costs. ¶37

Karmegam Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None - the writ petition was dismissed and the Tahsildar's penalty order was left undisturbed; no order as to costs.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned penalty order dated 28.12.2024 passed by the Tahsildar (Na.Ka.No.4909/2024/R1) violated natural justice and was liable to be quashed by a writ of certiorari under Article 226.

¶27

Court's answer

The petitioner's act of removing valuable trees belonging to the Government is an act of theft; the Tahsildar took a lenient approach by imposing cost instead of lodging a complaint against the petitioner.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

The plea of violation of natural justice does not apply to the petitioner, who was well aware that the trees belonged to the Government and nevertheless proceeded to cut and remove them.

¶30

Key takeaways

In the light of the discussion, the Court found no reasons to interfere with the impugned order; the writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Constitutional Law - Art. 226 - Writ of Certiorari - Penalty for unauthorised felling of Government trees. Petitioner Karmegam, without permission, cut Usilai trees standing on Government poramboke land on the banks of Marukal; the trees admittedly belonged to the Government. The Tahsildar, Melur, by order Na.Ka.No.4909/2024/R1 dated 28.12.2024, valued each tree at Rs.200/- and, by detailed calculation, imposed a penalty of Rs.16,000/-. Challenging the order as violative of natural justice, the petitioner sought its quashing. Justice V. Lakshminarayanan held that removing valuable trees belonging to the Government amounts to theft; that the Tahsildar had taken a lenient course in merely imposing cost rather than lodging a complaint; and that the natural justice plea did not apply, as the petitioner knew the trees were Government-owned. Finding no reason to interfere, the Court dismissed the writ petition with no order as to costs and closed connected W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2498 & 2500 of 2025. (Decided 07.02.2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.3512 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 07.02.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.3512 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2498 & 2500 of 2025

¶8

Karmegam . ...Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Tahsildar, Taluka Office, Melur, Madurai District.

¶11

The Revenue Inspector, Melavalavu, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

¶12

The Village Administrative Officer, Sekkipatti, Melur Taluk, Madurai District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶14

praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the impugned order

¶15

___________Page 1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.3512 of 2025

¶18

passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.4909/2024/R1 dated 28.12.2024 and to quash the same as illegal.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srikanth, For R1 to R3 : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This writ petition has been filed seeking certiorari to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No. 4909/2024/R1, dated 28.12.2024.

¶22

2.The petitioner, without authorization, cut Usilai trees on the banks of Marukal. It is not in dispute that he cut large trees and thirteen smaller ones. He is not the owner of the trees. The trees were grown on the Government poramboke land and the Government was the owner of the trees. No permission was sought for from the Government prior to cutting the same.

¶23

___________Page 2 of 5

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.(MD) No.3512 of 2025

¶26

3.The Tahsildar, on coming to know of this fact, imposed penality

¶27

of Rs.16,000/- under the impugned order. Pleading that natural justice has been violated, the present writ petition has been presented.

¶28

4.I heard, Mr.S.Srikanth, for the petitioner and Mr.Kannan Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶29

5.The act of the petitioner in removing valuable trees belonging to

¶30

the Government is an act of theft. The Tahsildar seems to have taken a very lenient approach and has only imposed cost instead of lodging a complaint against the petitioner. The petitioner should thank his stars that the Government did not take a tough position against him. Per tree the Tahsildar has valued it at Rs.200/- and has given a detailed calculation and imposed the penalty of Rs.16,000/-. The plea that there is a violation of natural justice certainly does not apply to him.

¶31

6.This is for the simple reason, the petitioner being well aware that

¶32

the trees belonged to the Government proceeded to cut and remove the same.

¶33

___________Page 3 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.3512 of 2025

¶36

7.In the light of the above discussion, I do not find any reasons to

¶37

interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶38

07.02.2025

¶39

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes LR To 1. The Tahsildar, Taluka Office, Melur, Madurai District.

¶40