S.SIVANANTHAVADIVEL Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 4.10.2013 made in W.P.No.32045 of 2012, wherein the appellant has challenged the rejection of license to quarry in Survey Nos.1033/A1A, 1033/C1, 1034/A1 and 1035/3 to an extent of 3.57.0 Hectares, which was earlier granted for a period from 29.9.2006 to 28.9.2011. On the expiry of the earlier license period, the appellant has filed a fresh application, as there was no renewal clause in the original license condition.

(2.) The said application was submitted on the ground that there was a delay in commencing the quarrying operations and heavy bank loans were obtained and a lot of persons were employed to do the quarrying operations and if license is granted for a further period of five years, the Government will get more revenue. Since the said application was not considered, the appellant earlier filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.3740 of 2012 and in the said writ petition, an order was passed on 20.3.2013, directing the first respondent herein to consider the application of the appellant and pass orders on merits, after hearing the second respondent, the local body. After the said direction was issued, the first respondent has passed an order dated 30.10.2012, rejecting the request of the appellant for grant of license for further period of five years.

(3.) The first respondent rejected the request stating that an objection was raised by the second respondent to grant quarry license to the appellant on the ground that quarrying work will affect the new crematorium, which is under construction within 100 metres from the above quarry site, which will cause danger to the public, while assembling in the crematorium. In view of the public safety and welfare, the application seeking license for a further period of five years cannot be granted. In the said order itself, it is further stated that if the appellant is aggrieved, he can file an appeal before the Director of Geology and Mining within a period of 30 days, in terms of Rule 36(C)2 of The Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. The said order of the first respondent was challenged by the appellant before the learned Single Judge by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.32045 of 2012 and the learned single Judge dismissed the said writ petition by holding that the quarrying site is within the prohibited area and hence, the rejection of the license by the first respondent cannot be found fault with. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ appeal has been filed.