19-05-2025
HC directs Industries Department to pay ₹20 lakh to petitioners for wilful disobedience of court orders
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed the Industries Department to pay a sum of ₹20 lakh to petitioners and another ₹5 lakh to the Chief Justice Relief Fund for the wilful disobedience of court orders to grant permission for sand quarrying operations in Tiruchi district.
The court was hearing a contempt petition filed in 2015 by Babu of Tiruchi, the original petitioner. The other petitioners B. Shanthi, B. Balaji, B. Vishnuvaradan, B. Umamaheswari and D. Bhavani, his family members, were added as petitioners following the demise of Babu.
The contempt petition was filed for non compliance of the order wherein Tiruchi Collector was directed to grant permission for quarrying sand in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the pathway permission from the Forest Department with conditions stipulated by the Supreme Court.
The petitioner was granted licence to quarry sand covering an extent of 10 hectares in Srinivasanallur village at Thottiyam taluk in Tiruchi district for three years from December 2001 to December 2004. Subsequently, the State government issued a G.O. in 2003 introducing Rule 38-A to the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, thereby taking over the operation of sand quarries by the government. The court upheld the validity of the G.O. subject to certain directions in favour of the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the same, the State government preferred a Civil Appeal before the Supreme Court which upheld the validity of Rule 38-A, while permitting the lessees who were in existence as October 2, 2003, to continue quarrying operations and also directed refund of the unutilised lease amounts. A review petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
Pursuant to the Supreme Court order Tiruchi Collector permitted the petitioner to carry on quarrying operations for six months. However, the petitioner was unable to commence the quarrying operations as the Forest Department deferred passing an order granting permission to use the pathway for transportation. Consequently, the permission period for quarrying operations expired.
The petitioner sought extension of the quarrying period, which was rejected on the ground that the original permission period had already lapsed. The rejection order was challenged. In 2010, the court directed the petitioner to approach the Forest Department for permission to use the pathway and to approach Tiruchi Collector for extension of the quarry lease.
The petitioner submitted an application to the Forest Department and the Department granted permission to use the pathway. Subsequently, the petitioner approached Tiruchi Collector for extension of the lease period. However, the same was disregarded. by Tiruchi Collector. A contempt petition was filed before the court.
Justice K. Kumaresh Babu said the court was of the view that there has been a violation of the orders of the court. Such violation is a wilful disobedience only to deny the benefits of the order of the court to the petitioner. There was a collective bureaucratic effort in seeing to defend the violation of the orders of the court by taking protection under the umbrella of subsequent events.
