Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33067 (MAD)

A.INDIRA v. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

WP/9319/2025 · 2025-03-19

K Rajasekar, S M Subramaniam

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:MHC:1006 WP No. 9319 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-03-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR WP No. 9319 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 10466 OF 2025 1. A.Indira 2.M.K.Arivazhgan Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal. 2.The Assistant Director Directorate Of Town And Country Planning, 1st Floor, District Collectorate Building, Namakkal-637 005. 3.The Assistant Director Department Of Geology And Mining Namakkal District-637 005. 4.The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Namakkal 637 003. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 9319 of 2025 5.The Block Development Officer, Namakkal. Respondent(s) WP No. 9319 of 2025 PRAYER directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation / objections dated 10.06.2024 and 19.11.2024 and forbear the respondents 1 to 5 from granting any building permission or layout approval within the “Prohibited Distance” 500 meters distance from the petitioner's Live Stone Crusher Unit and 300 Meters from the quarry site comprised in S.F.Nos.353/2, 354 and 469/1A, situated at Periyappati Village, Namakkal. WP No. 9319 of 2025 For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Vignesh For Respondent(s): Mr.E.Vijay Anand AGP R1 To 3 Mr.V.Gunasekar Standing Counsel For TNPCB For R4 Mrs.Indhu Bala AGP For R5 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation. However, the writ petition is based merely on an apprehension. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 9319 of 2025 2. It is needless to state that the authorities must scrupulously follow the applicable Statues and Rules in force. When a decision is to be taken by the competent authorities in a particular locality, seeking a negative response by submitting a representation does not warrant judicial intervention throug a writ petition. 3. Thus, the present Writ Petition is not entertainable and consequently stands dismissed. No costs. The connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. (S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.) 19-03-2025 Jeni Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 9319 of 2025 WP No. 9319 of 2025 To 1.The District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal. 2.The Assistant Director Directorate Of Town And Country Planning, 1st Floor, District Collectorate Building, Namakkal-637 005. 3.The Assistant Director Department Of Geology And Mining Namakkal District-637 005. 4.The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Namakkal 637 003. 5.The Block Development Officer, Namakkal. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 9319 of 2025 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND K.RAJASEKAR J. Jeni WP No. 9319 of 2025 19-03-2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis