A.Venkatachalam Vs the Assistant Director

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- 11, dated 01.06.2026 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and without any basis.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

ORDER

¶16

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up

¶17

for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶18

Page1 of 5

¶19

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

¶20

WP No. 23820 of 2026

¶21

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 /2026-11, dated 01.06.2026 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal.

¶22

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:

¶23

“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).

¶24

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 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.

¶25

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

¶26

__________ Page2 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 23820 of 2026

¶29

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.

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Page3 of 5

¶35

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

¶36

WP No. 23820 of 2026

¶37

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.

¶38

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.

¶39