High CourtsDivision Bench(2008) 01 MAD CK 0176

A. Vijaya Murugan vs The Government of Tamil Nadu and Chindia Granites (P) Ltd.

Madras High Court · Decided on 7 January 2008

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J · M. Venugopal, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 32943 of 2004, WPMP No. 39863 of 2004 and WVMP No. 167 of 2005

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

61 paragraphs · 1,296 words

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.—This Writ Petition, in public interest, has been preferred by the petitioner for the issuance of a writ of mandamus,

directing respondents-1 to 3 to cancel the permission given to the fourth respondent to carry on mining operations for multi coloured granite in the

1.28.5 hectares of lands in Survey Nos. 168, 169/8A and 169/8B in Pudukottai Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudunagar District.

2.

According to the petitioner, Vellur Thathaperumalkulam Tank is the basic source of water for agriculture and about 300 acres of ayacut

cultivating paddy crop and 500 acres of dry crop depend upon the water from the said Tank. Those lands have been getting water from the Tank

for the past several centuries. Besides agriculture, the Tank is also the source of water supply to the people of nearby five villages viz.,

Kumarapuram, Muthukumarapuram, Vellur, Saththapillai and Chidambarapuram. About 7000 people and 150 families totally depend upon the

said tank for irrigation purposes and also for grazing cattle in the said area. The Tank is getting its entire water from the neighbouring catchment

area of about 43 sq. km. Water flowing from the catchment area is enough to fill the Tank every year and adequate water is supplied for cultivation

of lands and for supply of drinking water. If the Tank does not receive its regular inflow, about 300 acres of ayacut cultivating paddy crop and 500

acres of dry crop will be affected. Besides that, supply of drinking water to about 20000 families of adjacent villages will be put to jeopardy, cattle

grazing will be affected and job opportunities to about 4000 farmers will also be hit. Since the site of the fourth respondent is proximate to the

catchment area, very nearer to the Tank in question, and at one point, the distance between the tank and the said lands being 600 Mts., quarrying

operations will completely obstruct free flow of water into the Vellur Tank from the 43 sq. km. catchment area, affecting cultivation of paddy crop

and dry crops. Further, it will also cause environmental pollution in the locality.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner informed that the quarry site is nearer to three ancient temples, namely, Shri Melanmadai

Muniandi Temple, Shri Ayyanar Temple and Shri Pathirakaliamman Temple, and people going to these temples to worship will be disturbed by the

quarrying operations. Further, the same will also cause noise pollution in the area and will affect the health of the public.

4.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that the State Government, after duly considering various aspects of the

matter, issued G.O. 3(D) No. 62, Industries (MMB-2) Department, dated 15.12.2003, granting lease in favour of the fourth respondent for

quarrying multi coloured granite for 20 years. Placing reliance on the Combined Map of Pudukottai Village Part and Vellore Village Part, District:

Virudhunagar, Taluk: Sivakasi-Pudukottai Village and Virudhunagar-Villore Village, submitted by the Collector, Virudunagar District, he pointed

out that the quarrying site is about 500 to 600 Mts. away from the Tank, the feeding channel to the Tank is located on the northern side and

Temples are far away from the quarry which is on the other side of the Tank; that being so, there is no substance in the contentions raised by the

learned Counsel for the petitioner.

5.

According to the learned Counsel for the 4th respondent, the lease granted by virtue of the Government Order dated 15.12.2003 has not been

challenged by the petitioner and therefore, no relief can be granted in the present case.

6.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, while making his arguments, mainly relied on paragraph Nos. 6 to 8 of

the counter affidavit, which read as follows:

6.

It is respectfully submitted that Thatha Perumalkulam Tank with an extent of about more than 50 acres is located at a distance of 500m from the

unit. The source of water in the tank is rain water and about 150 acres of ayacut is being cultivated using the tank water. Eight numbers of

borewells located inside the tank are utilized for drinking purposes of the villages located nearby namely Vellore, Kumarapuram, Sathapillaipatty,

Muthukumarapuram, Chidamabarapuram etc. with a total population of about 10,000. If the quarrying activities are carried out to a depth of more

than 23 feet, the tank water may reach the quarry resulting in reduction of water into the tank and no methodology was drawn by the unit either to

control ground vibration or to stop the leaching of the tank water into quarry.

7.

It is respectfully submitted that Vellore with population of 800 is located at a distance of 1.5km, Pudukottai with population of 200 is located at

a distance of 1.2km kalayar kular kurichi with population of 300 is located at a distance of 2 km and temple is located at a distance of 0.7km from

the quarry. Hence the quarry operation may disturb the village people with less magnitude and may not affect the worship of the people in the

temple.

8.

It is respectfully submitted that about 500-700 peacocks are found in the locality. The quarrying operation will disturb the peacocks and they

may disappear. The quarrying operation may affect the ecology, environment of the tank and surrounding area as the proposed quarry site is

located at a distance of 0.5km from Kulam.

7.

We have heard the counsels appearing for the parties and also noticed the stand taken by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board as referred

to above. Admittedly, the Government Order dated 15.12.2003, by which the fourth respondent was granted lease for quarrying multi coloured

granites for 20 years, is not under challenge; thus, generally, a public interest litigation against such order is not entertained by this Court. However,

taking note of the submission made/information furnished by the learned Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to the

effect that if quarrying activities are carried out to the depth of more than 23 ft., the Tank Water may reach the quarry resulting in reduction of

water level in the tank; that no methodology was drawn by the Unit either to control ground vibration or to stop the leaching of the tank water into

quarry and that the quarrying operation may disturb Peacocks, by reason of which, there is an apprehension that they would disappear; we are of

the view that the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai, should enquire into the matter and take all necessary steps to ensure that the

public in general and their source of water for irrigation and drinking purposes are not affected due to multi coloured granite quarrying operations

by the fourth respondent. The second respondent/Board is accordingly directed to make inspection of the quarry site and suggest/evolve the

safeguards/measures that are required to be taken; forward a copy of the report in that regard to the District Collector of Virudhunagar District;

and insist upon the fourth respondent to take all necessary steps/precautionary measures as adverted to in the Report and also to adopt the

methodology to control ground vibration and stop leaching of the water into the quarry, whereupon, the fourth respondent shall take instant steps

for compliance so as to ensure that the Tank Water is not reduced. In case of non-compliance within the time-frame as may be provided by the

Board for compliance, it may inform the District Collector, Virudhunagar District and the competent authority mentioned in the Government Order

ie., G.O.3(D) No. 62, Industries (MMB-2) Department, dated 15.12.2003, who may take appropriate steps to cancel the lease, of course, after

notice and hearing the fourth respondent.

Writ Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and direction, but, there shall be no order as to costs. Connected Miscellaneous

Petitions stand closed.