M.Rajeshkumar Vs the Assistant Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

M.Rajeshkumar Vs the Assistant Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Ten weeks' time from the date of uploading of the web copy (without awaiting certified copy) to produce documents and submit reply before the respondent; respondent to afford hearing thereafter and pass orders in accordance with law; no coercive proceedings in the interim per State Counsel's submission; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions (WMP.Nos.25766 & 25767 of 2026) closed. Merits and jurisdictional validity of the show cause notice were not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned show cause notice dated 01.06.2026 (Na.Ka.No.969/Kanimam/2026-14) should be quashed by a Writ of Certiorari as arbitrary and illegal. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner is granted ten weeks' time from the date of uploading of the web copy, without waiting for receipt of the certified copy of the order, to produce the documents and submit its reply before the respondent.

Key takeaways

After the reply is submitted, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and proceed to pass orders in accordance with law.ratio¶36
No coercive proceedings are to be initiated in the interim; learned State Counsel for the respondent submitted that they do not intend to do so until then.ratio¶37
The writ petition stands disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT (Mohammed Shaffiq, J.), 22-06-2026 | WP No. 23779 of 2026 (with WMP.Nos.25766 & 25767 of 2026) | M.Rajeshkumar v. The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mining, Tirupur District | Certiorari sought against Show Cause Notice Na.Ka.No.969/Kanimam/2026-14 dated 01.06.2026, which (per the adopted directions) proposed action for alleged infraction of Rules 41 and 42, more particularly Rule 41(10)(i)(ii), of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. Taken up for final disposal at admission stage by consent; following the directions issued in similar W.P.No.22117 of 2026 (order dated 12.06.2026), the Court granted ten weeks from upload of the web copy (without awaiting certified copy) to produce documents and file reply; respondent to afford hearing and pass orders in accordance with law; no coercive proceedings meanwhile (State Counsel's undertaking); petition disposed of, no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. The jurisdictional-infirmity challenge to the notice was not decided.

WP No. 23779 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

WP No. 23779 of 2026 and WMP.Nos.25766 & 25767 of 2026

M.Rajeshkumar S/o.K.Mani, No.3/323, Trichy Salai, Karanampettai, Palladam Taluk, Tiruppur District.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

The Assistant Director Department of Geology and Mining, Tirupur District.

..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the respondent in Impugned Show Cause Notice bearing Na.Ka.No.969 / Kanimam /2026- 14, dated 01.06.2026 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and without any basis.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. M.Suresh Kumar for Mr.U.Baranidharan

For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Elayaraj Kumar Government Counsel

Page1 of 5

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

WP No. 23779 of 2026

ORDER

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the respondent in impugned show cause Notice bearing Na.Ka.No.969 / Kanimam /2026- 14, dated 01.06.2026 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal.

Learned counsel for petitioner and respondent would submit in unison that under similar circumstances, this Court in W.P.No.22117 of 2026 vide order dated 12.06.2026, issued the following directions and that the same directions may be issued in this writ petition:

“The present writ petition has been filed challenging the show cause notice dated 01.06.2026, whereby it was proposed to initiate action for alleged infraction of Rule 41 and 42 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, more particularly, Rule 41(10)(i)(ii).

2. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that any response to the impugned show cause notice may require at least 12 weeks’ time inasmuch as they may have to gather and collate documents, which are almost four decades long. He would submit that though they had earlier submitted a

Page2 of 5

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

WP No. 23779 of 2026

request seeking 60 days’ time, they now realise that in view of the voluminous records which may have to be produced, that may not be adequate.

3. Learned State Counsel for respondent would submit that petitioner may be granted eight weeks’ time.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner also attempted to submit how the impugned show cause notice itself suffers from infirmities which go to the root of jurisdiction with regard to the issuance of show cause notice.

5. This Court is not inclined to go into the above question for the present, however, keeping in view the above request made by learned counsel for petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant petitioner ten weeks’ time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, to produce the documents and submit its reply before the respondent, thereafter, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of hearing to petitioner and proceed to pass orders, in accordance with law.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner would also request that no coercive proceedings may be initiated till then, for which learned State Counsel for respondent would submit that they do not intend to do so until then.

7. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.”

__________ Page3 of 5

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

WP No. 23779 of 2026

In view of the above submission, this Court is inclined to grant petitioner ten weeks’ time from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for receipt of certified copy of the order, to produce the documents and submit its reply before the respondent, thereafter, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of hearing to petitioner and proceed to pass orders, in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for petitioner would also request that no coercive proceedings may be initiated till then, for which learned State Counsel for respondent would submit that they do not intend to do so until then.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

22-06-2026

(3/6)

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ANU

To

The Assistant Director Department of Geology and Mining, Tirupur District.

__________ Page4 of 5

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

WP No. 23779 of 2026

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

ANU

WP No. 23779 of 2026 and WMP.Nos.25766 & 25767 of 2026

22-06-2026 (3/6)

__________ Page5 of 5

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