1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.10629 of 2011 A.Soundra Rajan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The District Collector, Tuticorin and District. 2. The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mines, Collectorate, Tuticorin and District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to use Poclain/Machine to quarry gravel/sand at 27.19.5 Hec. of land in Survey No.62/2B, Kanmai, Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District as per the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.Ge.Am.1/240/2009 dated 21.07.2011 on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner dated 26.08.2011 to the respondents. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugalenthi, Special Govt. Pleader O R D E R The petitioner A.Soundra Rajan has filed the present Writ Petition seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the District Collector, Tuticorin District and the Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mines, Tuticorin District to permit the petitioner to use Poclain/Machine to quarry gravel/sand at 27.19.5 Hec. of land in Survey No.62/2B, Kanmai, Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District, as per the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.Ge.Am.1/240/2009 dated 21.07.2011, on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner dated 26.08.2011 to the respondents. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the first respondent permitted the petitioner to quarry gravel/sand at Kanmai in Survey No.62/2B of Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District. The first respondent after getting statements from the second respondent viz., the Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mines and other authorities, has issued the order dated 21.07.2011, permitting the petitioner to quarry gravel/sand in Survey No.62/2B, Kanmai, Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is when the first respondent has already permitted the petitioner to quarry gravel/sand subject to the conditions mentioned in proceedings dated 21.07.2011 and the said proceedings does not mention the use of Poclain to quarry gravel, it is not open to the respondents to prevent the petitioner from using poclain to quarry gravel/sand in Survey No.62/2B, Kanmai, Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District. As the petitioner was prevented from using poclain, the petitioner has made a representation on 26.08.2011 and the representation was not duly considered. Consequently, the petitioner has come to this Court by filing https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the present Writ petition. It has been submitted that the ground is so hard and therefore, without the assistance of machine, it is very difficult to quarry gravel. Further, the petitioner is not able to find sufficient man power to quarry gravel/sand. In view of that, the learned counsel for the petitioner by bringing to the notice of this Court the conditions mentioned in the proceedings issued on 21.07.2011, that there is no such condition preventing the petitioner from using poclain, prayed for a direction to the respondents not to prevent the petitioner from using poclain to quarry gravel/sand in Survey No.62/2B, Kanmai, Alampatti Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Tuticorin District. 3. In reply, Mr.B.Pugalenthi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that when the first respondent has already issued the proceedings dated 21.07.2011, specifically mentioning that the petitioner cannot use the poclain or any machine, the petitioner can rely upon only the subsequent proceedings issued by the second respondent, wherein the second respondent has not mentioned as one of the conditions not to use the machine or poclain. Since the first respondent has already mentioned in his proceedings dated 21.07.2011, the use of poclain will be forbitten by the respondents, a conjoint reading of the proceedings dated 21.07.2011 issued by the first respondent, the District Collector, Tuticorin and the additional conditions issued on 25.07.2011 clearly goes to show that the petitioner cannot use the poclain. In view of that, this Court finds no merits in the Writ Petition. Accordingly, this Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. SD DEPUTY REGISTRAR ( Accounts ) /TRUE COPY/ ASST REGISTRAR akv To 1. The District Collector, Tuticorin and District. 2. The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mines, Collectorate, Tuticorin and District. 1CC TO MR. B. RAJESH SARAVANAN,ADVOCATE, SR: 40732: DM::2011:DECEMBER:16:: W.P.(MD)No.10629 of 2011 21.11.2011 2P:4C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/