CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 09 MAD CK 0142

D.V. Minerals vs The District Collector, The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining and V. Prabhu Raj

Madras High Court · Decided on 28 September 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
S. Nagamuthu, J · P. Jyothimani, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal (MD) No. 549 of 2010 and M.P. (MD) No''s. 1 and 2 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 347 words

P. Jyothimani, J.—The issue involved in this Writ Petition relates to mining operation in Survey No. 27/4 (Part) covering an extent of 4.00.5 Hectares stated to have been registered in the name of Thiru. A. Venkataraman, S/o. Thiru. Ariyagoundar in Patta No. 109 of Palayam Village.

2.

While considering the validity of the impugned order passed by the District Collector dated 20.04.2009, by which the District Collector has rejected the claim of the appellant to give transport permits for removal of quarrying minerals holding that the same would be given in the name of the third respondent, the learned Judge having found that the third respondent has surrendered his licence in respect of quarrying, directed the parties to work out their remedy in the manner known to law. As against the said order of the learned Judge, the Writ Appeal is filed.

3.

Today when the Appeal is being heard, learned Counsel for the third respondent has made the following statements viz.,-

(i) that the third respondent has absolutely no claim in respect of the lands to the extent of 4.00.5 Hectares comprised in Survey No. 27/4 (Part), which is the subject matter of the mining lease;

(ii) that the third respondent has already surrendered his licence which was standing in the name of DV Minerals, claiming himself to be the sole proprietor. He has no objection for obtaining a fresh licence in the name of the appellant to quarry in the survey number stated above; and

(iii) that the third respondent has also given an undertaking that no minerals in the Survey No. 27/4(Part), which is the subject matter of mining application, shall be removed by the third respondent. The third respondent has also filed an affidavit to that effect.

4.

Recording the said statement made by the learned Counsel for the third respondent and also the affidavit filed by the third respondent, the Writ Appeal stands closed leaving it open to the appellant to work out the remedy in the manner known to law for obtaining fresh licence. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.