1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.10.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU Writ Petition (MD)No.4682 of 2011 and M.P (MD) Nos.1, 2 and 3 of 2011 K.Paramathy Union Crusher Jelly Manufacturers Health Association, Rep. By its Secretary Mr.P.Ramalingam, 5, Amman Complex, 2/424, Covai Main Road, K.Paramathy – 639 111. ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary, Industries Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 3. The Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Karur District, Karur. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the first respondent's G.O (Ms) No.19 Industries (MMD1) Department dated 25.01.2011 quash the same and direct the respondents not to interfere with the members of petitioner's right to deal with the stone either rough or processed which has been transported with valid transport permits by paying necessary seigniorage. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Srinvas For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan Special Government Pleader O R D E R The petitioner's Association comprises of crusher jelly manufacturers represented by its Secretary, has filed the present Writ Petition, challenging the statutory amendment Rules framed under Section 15(1) & (1-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and also Section 23(C)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The Rules are known as the Tamil Nadu Prevention of illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage of Minerals and Mineral Dealers' Rule 2011. 2. Under the said Rules, the State Government has power to grant registration and renewal of registration. If any person wants to get registration he must make application to the District Collector, pursuant to the said registration. Transport permit and transit pass will be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 issued, while issuing such registration. Conditions under Rule 7 can be imposed. Any violation of the condition will result in confiscation and seizure of the materials including the transport vehicles and custody can be taken over. There are also penalties provided under the Rules. It is not clear that as to how the association can challenge said Rules. Even though, it is stated that the names of the members of the petitioners' association are set out in the typed set along with the registration certificate, the grievances of individual members are not spelt out. 3. The contention raised by the petitioner was that the Rules are without jurisdiction and the impugned Rule 38-C was also invalid and contrary to Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It is also stated that though the alleged purpose of introduction of preventing the illegal quarrying and transportation of mineral and not for controlling the mineral trade and sale of stone. Whenever any illicit quarrying or illicit transport or illicit storage of the mineral is noticed by the authorities by such quarrying, transport and storage can always be curbed by the State Government. But the present G.O places restriction on the petitioner in carrying out their trade and the Rules are totally against the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and against the law declared by the Principal Bench in 1993 WLR 1963 and confirmed by the Supreme Court in AIR 1995 SC 858. It states that once the mineral is quarried and seigniorage is paid, the ownership of the said mineral passes into the hands of the lessee or its subsequent purchasers. The Act also enable to set up check-post and weigh bridges and there is no deliberation of State Government to frame the Rule, which is set out herein. The question of identifying the stone lying at the stockyard or processing unit, if each sale bill to the sale tax department is practically impossible to sign each bill like the transportation of textiles. 4. It is stated that these Rules when challenged before the Principal Bench, they were dismissed and it was held that the State Government has power under both enactments including under the Central Rules. Similarly Rules are enacted to achieve the object of prevailing large scale illegal quarrying of minerals, illegal transportation and its storage. The Rules are regulatory in nature and not a restraint on any lawful trade or business, as contended by the petitioner. 5. Merely because, the members of the petitioners' association have some irritant in the observance of the Rules that cannot be a ground for impugning the Rule. Already this Court has held in many cases and in a public interest litigation is monitoring such illegal quarrying and it had issued several guidelines. A committee was also formed to prevent such quarrying. The Rules are only intended to enhance the public vigil over the preservation of the minerals. The petitioner cannot claim unbridled right to deal with such minerals. 6. Under the said circumstances, as the impugned Rules are made in public interest and does not affect the rights of the members of the petitioner's Association in any way, there is no question of holding them as ultra vires and unconstitutional. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Records) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Industries Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 3. The Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Karur District, Karur. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.36106 +1CC TO M/S.P.SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE SR.36187 Ps SR : 02.11.2011 : 3p/6c W.P.(MD)No.4682 of 2011 18.10.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/