C VELAYUTHAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed seeking for the relief of issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent relating to the letter No. 32162/mmc-2/97-4 dated 3. 3. 1998 and consequently direct the respondents to refix the lease amount of Rs. 7 lakhs for the first year lease amount and refund the excess amount paid by the petitioner and grant the area as notified without any reduction in respect of quarry between miles 13/0 to 15/2 miles in Karakkadu to Thailampalayam villages falling in S. F. Nos. 354 and 360 of Revenue villages of Arasalur and Thailampalayam respectively on the left bank of cauvery river in Musiri Taluk, Tiruchirapalli District.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the second respondent notified the sand quarry at the left bank of Cauvery river from miles 13/0 to 15/2 between Karaikkadu and Thailampalayam villages in Musiri Taluk for public auction and called for tender applications for leasing out the same for a period of three years in the District Gazette dated 7. 3. 1993 under Rule 8 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959; that the petitioner submitted his tender application by quoting tender amount of Rs. 7 lakhs as first year lease amount under preferential category as per the then rule 8 (1) (c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules; that the amount quoted by the petitioner was the highest amount; that the same quarry was leased out only for a sum of Rs. 3,500/- in the earlier year; but the second respondent rejected the highest bid of the petitioner on the only ground that the petitioner was an affluent person by his order dated 07. 04. 1994 on the only ground that the petitioner was an affluent person by his order dated 07. 04. 1994; that aggrieved against the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Director of Geology and Mining, who also dismissed the appeal on 6. 10. 1994 without considering the valid point raised by the petitioner; that aggrieved against the order of the Director of Geology and Mining, the petitioner filed the writ petition before this Court in W. P. No. 19645 of 1994; that in the said writ petition, originally there was an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents from leasing out the said quarry; pending the writ petition before this Court, the petitioner has also filed several representations before the second respondent, which have not between considered by them; hence the petitioner was forced to file a writ petition in W. P. No. 15111 of 1996 for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to dispose of the representation; that this Court by its order dated 28. 10. 1996 directed the District collector to dispose of his representation one way or other within four weeks thereafter. Pursuant to the order of this Court, it seems an opinion has been obtained from the Government Pleader and based on the opinion the District Collector has directed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition so as to enable him to consider his application and on the promise of the District Collector the writ petition was withdrawn. However, by order dated 6. 2. 1997, the District collector granted lease for a period of three years by raising the lease amount to as high as Rs. 27 lakhs, which is nearly four times over and above what the petitioner has offered and also restricted the area to 10 hectares. Not satisfied with the grant, the petitioner has made a representation to the Government to the effect that the order of the Collector in raising the lease amount to Rs. 27 lakhs and also reducing the area to 10 hectares is arbitrary and requested the Government to grant the entire area as notified in the Gazette for the highest amount quoted by him i. e. , for Rs. 7 lakhs. The Government by its order dated 3. 3. 1998 rejected the request of the petitioner. As against the said order, the present writ petition is filed and it has been admitted as early as 1998 and even in the present writ petition also, there is an order of injunction restraining the respondent from leasing out the remaining area as granted in the earlier writ petition. Subsequently the said order of injunction has also been extended by this Court in its order dated 6. 10. 1998.

(3.) THE interim application in W. M. P. No. 30491 of 2000 is filed with a prayer to permit the petitioner to quarry sand from the notified area from miles 13/0 to 15/2 between Karaikkadu and Thailampalayam villages on the left bank of Cauvery river in Musiri Taluk excluding ten hectares already granted pending disposal of the writ petition.