S ANDIAPPAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has come forward to challenge the order passed by the District Collector, Pudukottai (1st Respondent) dated 07.10.2009.

(2.) In the impugned order, the District Collector, Pudukottai, rejected the case of the Petitioner forquarrying roughstone in Survey No. 39/1A, 1B and 4B to anextent of 0.48.5 hectares of Patta land. The Petitioner wanted to quarry rough stone, which is admittedly coming under the purview of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. Therefore, it requires a permission from the competent authority. The competent authority on entertaining the application, called for a report from the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukottai. The Revenue Divisional Officer gave a report and on the basis of the said report, the Petitioner's request was refused. In the said impugned order, it was stated as follows:

(3.) It is by this order and by stating these reasons, the Petitioner's request was rejected in terms of Rule 36(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. The Petitioner made two submissions. The first submission was that along with the application, he had also produced no objection letter from the persons, who are put up houses in the natham puramboke land in the nearby area. The second submission was that no opportunity was given in terms of Rule 19(2)(B) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959.