1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.04.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.4939 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 J.Sahayaraj ..Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Divisional Forest Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 4.The Commissioner, Kodaikanal Municipality, Dindigul District. 5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 6.The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal, Dindigul District. ..Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to use the petitioner poclaine machines in bearing Registration No.TN-47-S-5173 for legal and permitted construction work in Kodaikanal hills and forbearing the respondents from seizing the vehicle which are engaged in legal and permitted construction work. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondents : Mr.V.Rajasekaran Special Government Pleader O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to permit him to use his poclaine machines in bearing Registration No.TN-47-S-5173 for legal and permitted construction work in Kodaikanal hills and forbearing the respondents from https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 seizing the vehicle which are engaged in legal and permitted construction work. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he is carrying out a business of renting out the JCB/Poclaine machines for legal and permitted construction works in and around Kodaikanal Town in the name and style of "Salaith Annai Earthmovers" and his machines were engaged in various construction contract works in and around the Kodaikanal hills. In order to carry out his professional activities, he has three poclaine machines and he is renting out the same to various persons who are involved in legal construction activities. While his customers were taking poclaine machines, the officials of the respondents 1 to 4 intercepted them in various areas in the hill and verified the records. Even after showing all the relevant documents, they were not permitted to take the vehicles. 4. Absolutely, there is no prohibition for using the poclaine machines by anybody for any legal or construction purpose in Kodaikanal hills. The restriction is only in respect of illegal quarrying with poclaine machines in the hill areas. However, the respondents without any order or communication from their higher officials, have detained the vehicle. They have not permitted him to work in the hill area. 5. The petitioner sent a representation to the respondents seeking to interfere in the matter and to permit him to operate his poclaine machines in the hill area and to carry out his legal construction activities. However, the said representation was not considered. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief stated earlier. 6. In similar circumstances, by an order dated 10.11.2008 in W.P.No.25849 of 2008, sitting in the Principal Bench, I have passed the following order:- “Admittedly, there is no prohibition for using the poclaine machine by anybody for any legal or for construction purpose. The prohibition is only in respect of illegal quarrying with the said machine. The respondents are at liberty to take action against the petitioner if he is using the machine for any unlawful purposes including illegal quarrying. But however, the respondents cannot prevent the petitioner from using the poclaine machine for any construction purposes or for other legal purposes. It is averred by the petitioner that the said machine is used only for construction purposes and nothing more. If that is so, as stated already, the petitioner cannot be prevented from using the poclaine machine. Hence, I am inclined to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's using the poclaine machine for any legal and permitted construction work. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. However, it is made clear that the respondents are at liberty to take action against the petitioner in the event of the petitioner using the poclaine machine for any illegal purpose or illegal quarrying. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.” https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7. I am told that no appeal has been filed against the said order. In view of the same, I am inclined to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's using the poclaine machines for any legal and permitted construction work. The Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. However, it is made clear that the respondents are at liberty to take action against the petitioner, in the event of the petitioner using the poclaine machine for any illegal purpose or illegal quarrying. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Divisional Forest Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 4.The Commissioner, Kodaikanal Municipality, Dindigul District. 5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District. 6.The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal, Dindigul District. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.15771 +1CC TO MR.M.AJMAL KHAN, ADVOCATE SR.15487 Sml SR : 17.05.2011 : 3p/9c Order made in W.P.(MD)No.4939 of 2011 Dated:- 27.04.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/