Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Case Number

W.P Nos. 33167 of 2007,W.P No. 13504 of 2003, W.P Nos. 34669, 36045, 39243 & 4552 of 2004, W.P Nos. 4910, 8179, 15456, 21831, 22711, 23140, 23516, 23802, 23803, 25212, 25700, 26988, 31275, 31673, 38781, 39326, 39338 and 117 of 2005, W.P Nos. 339, 340, 1149, 1339, 1927, 2982, 12665, 19147, 19724, 22127, 22322, 22852, 23357, 25421, 25853, 26129, 27106, 30312, 36427, 36828 & 40072 of 2006, W.P Nos. 1512, 9884, 10336, 10550, 11944, 14001, 15043, 15044, 15045, 15046, 19542, 22529, 24279, 24323, 24860, 25074, 25122, 25370, 27419, 27439, 27653, 27675, 27676, 28425, 28893, 29448, 29474, 29732, 30401, 31141, 31310, 32035, 32611, 32622, 32623, 32624, 32634, 33193, 33218, 33219, 33257, 34576, 34577, 34787, 37028 & 8829 of 2007, W.P Nos. 180, 522, 580, 608, 1002, 1628, 1629, 1860, 2060, 4540, 6000, 6238, 6700, 6752, 7115, 7260, 8145, 9547, 9599, 9827, 9828, 11076, 11561, 12520, 13710, 14228, 14639, 16319, 16379, 17119, 17120, 17363, 17424, 17459, 17461, 17567, 17820, 18567, 19469, 19801, 19802, 23035, 24911, 25192, 25121, 12104, 23048, 23731, 12104, 23048, 25731 & 24049 of 2008, W.P Nos. 5576, 5577, 850, 1058, 2499, 6067, 6540, 6798, 6799, 7268, 7295, 7929, 8006, 8178, 8436, 8486, 9113, 10099, 12111, 12112, 12113, 12592, 14068, 14231, 14559, 14560, 15082, 15083, 15161, 15299, 15489, 15589, 15590, 17562, 17564, 18827, 18828, 19776, 20273, 20564, 22791, 22892, 22977, 24240, 27299 & 27300 of 2009, W.P Nos. 28550, 29138, 29846, 28076, 28332 & 9292 of 2010, W.P Nos. 3932, 227, 281, 875, 876, 1611, 1612, 1768, 2126, 2322, 2420, 2574, 2580, 2815, 3108, 3359, 3583, 3632, 3034, 3633 & 3887 of 2011, W.P(MD) Nos. 3872, 4035, 5890, 7032, 7247, 7265, 7286, 7287, 7643, 7748, 8424, 7799, 7802, 7803, 8220, 8271, 8473, 8859, 8878, 8906, 8929, 8977, 8981, 8982, 9059, 9069, 9149, 9373, 9374, 9424, 9469, 9496, 9616, 9691, 9750, 9776, 9788, 9797, 9805, 9882, 9883, 9885, 10024, 10032, 10126, 10146, 10185, 10200, 10266, 10267, 10272, 10322, 10441, 10465, 10466, 10488, 10489, 10495, 10496, 10525, 10537, 10614, 10759, 10762, 10810, 10818, 10825, 10840, 10860, 10917, 11024, 10274, 10275, 7311, 7312, 7370, 9913, 10331, 10618, 10629, 10855 & 10929 of 2007, W.P(MD). Nos. 61, 84, 97, 102, 106, 120, 134, 188, 263, 277, 285, 296, 303, 360, 365, 389, 390, 392, 400, 406, 410, 418, 450, 452, 456, 466, 510, 578, 627, 664, 675, 817, 818, 1095, 1102, 1128, 1236, 1244, 1249, 1356, 1488, 1629, 1646, 1758, 1772, 1778, 1787, 1793, 1795, 1807, 1822, 1834, 1853, 1867, 1885, 1891, 1896, 1897, 1898, 1901, 1906, 1939, 1949, 1973, 2030, 2031, 2049, 2092, 2149, 2179, 2267, 2271, 2295, 2320, 2337, 2340, 2342, 2346, 2348, 2369, 2373, 2374, 2420, 2548, 2576, 2695, 2703, 2761, 2809, 2854, 2901, 2907, 2916, 2922, 2933, 2959, 2960, 2968, 2980, 2981, 3008, 3100, 3201, 3202, 3299, 3400, 3428, 3490, 3510, 3568, 3580, 3591, 3594, 3596, 3624, 3657, 3727, 3746, 3753, 3765, 3819, 3974, 3986, 4023, 4265, 4268, 4328, 4382, 4383, 4385, 4397, 4428, 4436, 4439, 4441, 4442, 4443, 4473, 4502, 4526, 4532, 4540, 4542, 4839, 5013, 5095, 5117, 5133, 5139, 5158, 5162, 5332, 5362, 5435, 5453, 5477, 5519, 5548, 5810, 5819, 5915, 6023, 6066, 6100, 6101, 6225, 6368, 6376, 6382, 6387, 6470, 6530, 6537, 6540, 7069, 7157, 7510, 1145, 1864, 4566, 4599, 4646, 4702, 4883, 6561, 7717, 7781, 7811, 7841, 7896, 7911, 7920, 7966, 8048, 8074, 8413, 8496, 9582, 9583, 9584, 9620, 9786, 9879, 9907, 9994, 10065, 10760, 25347, 214, 1408, 1873, 4208, 4732, 4893, 4897, 7392, 7525, 8414, 8891, 8905, 9030, 9175, 9260, 9319, 9320, 9321, 9322, 9323, 9324, 9466, 9497, 9546, 9678, 9793, 9949, 10028, 10206, 10619, 10635, 10968, 11128, 11417, 11738, 11757, 11913, 11915, 11917, 11998, 12229, 12370, 12371, 12379, 12386, 12387, 12389 & 11857 of 2008, W.P(MD). Nos. 601, 818, 932, 1002, 1035, 1036, 1205, 1315, 1827, 1850, 2036, 2131, 2133, 2248, 2309, 2544, 2652, 3170, 3243, 3292, 3334, 3381, 3636, 3719, 3816, 5175, 5203, 5223, 5234, 5235, 5245, 5260, 5290, 5291, 5400, 5889, 5998, 1437, 4097, 4101, 4562, 4567, 4576, 4647, 4706, 4737, 4743, 4748, 4749, 4772, 4773, 4802, 4852, 4853, 4865, 4866, 4868, 4893, 4901, 4923, 4961, 4972, 5008, 5070, 5071, 5072, 5193, 5198, 5216, 5456, 6409, 6530, 6620, 6724, 6728, 7002, 7060, 7187, 7215, 7253, 7261, 7264, 7361, 7670, 10948, 10, 62, 72, 93, 110, 387, 2943, 4971, 6891, 6986, 7540, 8698, 8831, 10193, 10254, 10579, 11042, 11112, 12010 & 12186 of 2009 W.P(MD) Nos. 4439, 1006, 3608, 3713, 4215 & 6297 of 2010 and connected Miscellaneous Petitions

Attorney(S)

V.T Gopalan, Senior Counsel for K. Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate for Petitioner.
Raja Kalifulla, Government Pleader assisted by R. Thirugnanam, Special Government Pleader for Respondents.

Judges

M. Yusuf Eqbal, C.J
P. Jyothimani & T.S Sivagnanam, JJ.

Acts

Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 by G.O.Ms No. 32, Industries (MMC2),
Rule 36(5)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959,
Rule 38-C(2)(b)]FORM OF THE SEAL OF TALUK HEADQUARTERS
Rule 38-C(2)(b)SALE SLIP ISSUED BY THE LICENSEE
Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959,
clause (a) of sub-rule (6).
Rule called Rule 38-C,
sub-rule (3).
Rule 38-C,

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Concise Structured Summary of the Provided Opinion

Factual and Procedural Background

The Petitioners are river-sand dealers who purchase sand from the Public Works Department (PWD) on bills, process/filter the sand using mechanized filters, and transport the processed or raw sand to purchasers using their own or hired vehicles after paying sales tax. They challenged the actions of respondents (District Collector and Assistant Director of Geology and Mining of various districts) who insisted that the Petitioners and their customers obtain transport permits or that the final place of destination be mentioned in the PWD bills before transporting sand from the Petitioners' stockyards.

The Petitioners relied on the view that once sand is sold by the PWD and seigniorage is paid, the purchaser becomes the absolute owner and there should be no subsequent governmental control over movement from the stockyard. A Division Bench of the High Court in W.P. Nos. 1251 of 2004, etc. (order dated 30.09.2005) had earlier held that authorities could not insist on transport permits or indication of final destination in PWD bills for transporting processed sand from the Petitioners' stockyards. The Government filed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) against that Division Bench order in the Supreme Court, leave was granted and the SLPs are pending.

Subsequent judicial proceedings raised doubts about the earlier Division Bench order (see W.P(MD) Nos. 3872 of 2007, etc., order dated 11.07.2007) and the matter was referred for determination by a Full Bench of this High Court. While the matter was pending, the Government amended the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 by G.O.Ms. No. 32 dated 11.02.2011, inserting Rule 38-C, which prescribes licensing, authenticated sale-slips, transport permits, record-keeping, and penalties (including seizure/confiscation) in relation to storage and transportation of sand.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether authorities may insist that Petitioners and their customers obtain transport permits or that the final place of destination be mentioned in PWD bills in order to transport processed/filtered/raw sand from the Petitioners' stockyards to purchasers.
Whether the amendment to the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules (introduction of Rule 38-C by G.O.Ms No. 32 dated 11.02.2011) affects the Petitioners' entitlement to relief previously granted by a Division Bench and, if so, whether mandamus relief can be issued in the face of the newly introduced Rule 38-C.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioners' Arguments

The Petitioners are lawful purchasers of sand from the PWD and transport the sand after processing it; they pay sales tax and, where applicable, seigniorage.
Once sand is sold by the PWD and seigniorage is paid, the purchaser (lessee) becomes the absolute owner of the mineral and the State should not have further control over movement of the quarried mineral from the stockyard.
Accordingly, the Petitioners sought an order forbidding the Respondents from insisting that they or their customers obtain transport permits or indicate final destination in PWD bills to transport the processed sand from their stockyards.
Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that because the Supreme Court had issued notice (and leave was granted) in relation to the earlier Division Bench order, that original order had "merged" and should control; this contention was advanced to resist the operation of the Government's later Rule amendment.

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the Respondents' legal arguments in opposition; it records the Government's legislative amendment (Rule 38-C) and the fact that SLPs were filed in the Supreme Court but does not set out a line-by-line adversarial argument by the Respondents.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Division Bench order in W.P. Nos. 1251 of 2004, etc. (order dated 30.09.2005)	Held that authorities cannot insist that Petitioners or their customers obtain transport permits or indicate final place of destination in PWD bills to transport processed/filtered sand from Petitioners' stockyards.	The opinion records this earlier ruling as the basis for prior relief to Petitioners; it also records that the Government filed SLPs against that order in the Supreme Court (leave granted) and that such proceedings are pending, which formed part of the procedural history but did not prevent the Government from later amending the Rules.
Division Bench order in W.P(MD) Nos. 3872 of 2007, etc. (order dated 11.07.2007)	Entertained doubts regarding the correctness of the earlier Division Bench order (W.P. Nos. 1251/2004 etc.).	As a result of the doubts, the matter was directed to be placed before the Chief Justice for constitution of an appropriate Full Bench; the court recorded this procedural development when explaining the current status of litigation.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court analyzed the matter primarily by reference to the statutory framework as amended by the Government (Rule 38-C introduced by G.O.Ms No. 32 dated 11.02.2011) and by comparing the statutory requirements with the relief sought by the Petitioners.

Key analytical steps recorded in the opinion:

The Court set out Rule 36(5)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 (relating to dispatch slips and bulk transport permits for quarrying permit-holders) and the effect of Rule 38-A (2003) vesting the right to exploit sand with the State (the latter having been held valid by the Court previously).
The Court noted the earlier Division Bench's 30.09.2005 order which had prohibited authorities from insisting on transport permits or final-destination entries in PWD bills for movement from stockyards, and that Government had challenged that order before the Supreme Court (SLPs with leave granted and pending).
However, the Court observed that the Government subsequently amended the Rules by introducing Rule 38-C (effective by G.O. dated 11.02.2011), which (a) requires transport permits issued by the PWD or sale slips authenticated by the taluk headquarters Deputy Tahsildar; (b) requires licensing for storage of sand for sale; (c) prescribes detailed content of sale slips (Appendix XVIII) including the name of the person and the place to which the sand is to be transported; and (d) provides for record-keeping, monthly returns, seizure/confiscation for illicit transport and other procedural conditions.
By a combined reading of Rule 38-C and its Appendices (XVII–XXII), the Court concluded that a statutory prohibition and obligations have been imposed on persons transporting sand without valid permits and on purchasers who store sand in stockyards to obtain authenticated sale slips specifying destination and other particulars.
Given the statutory changes effected by Rule 38-C, the Court held that the Petitioners could not be granted the relief sought (i.e., a direction forbidding authorities to insist on transport permits or final-destination entries), because the new rule imposes a statutory obligation that covers movement from stockyards as well.
The Court expressly rejected the Petitioners' counsel's contention that the earlier Division Bench order had merged by virtue of the Supreme Court issuing notice; instead the Court emphasized that the change in the Rules (Rule 38-C) altered the legal position and therefore precluded grant of the requested mandamus in the present petitions.

Holding and Implications

Holding:

DISMISSED — The Writ Petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous in view of the statutory amendment (Rule 38-C) which imposes the obligations challenged by the Petitioners.

Implications (direct, as stated in the opinion):

The Petitioners cannot obtain the specific relief of a mandamus forbidding the Respondents from insisting on transport permits or requiring notation of final destination in PWD bills for movement of sand from their stockyards, because Rule 38-C now imposes statutory obligations to obtain transport permits and authenticated sale slips (including destination particulars) and to be licensed for storage for sale.
If the Petitioners have a grievance against the newly introduced Rule 38-C, the opinion records that they must "work out their remedy in the manner known to law" (i.e., by challenging the Rule by appropriate legal proceedings), rather than obtaining the relief sought in these writ petitions.
The Court ordered dismissal of the writ petitions as infructuous and closed connected miscellaneous petitions; no costs were imposed.
The opinion does not purport to lay down a new precedent beyond applying the amended statutory scheme; it does not state that a new legal principle is being laid down for future cases beyond the specific outcome here.

This summary is based exclusively on the contents of the provided opinion. No facts or legal propositions have been added that do not appear in the opinion.

Show full summary ...

D. Sivakumar v. District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri

1. These Writ Petitions have been filed by the Petitioners, who are stated to be the dealers in river sand, for a direction to forbear the Respondents, the District Collector and the Assistant Director of Geology and Mining of various Districts from insisting the Petitioners and their customers, either to obtain transport permits or to get mentioning of the final place of destination in the bills issued by the Public Works Department, to transport the processed or filtered or raw sand from the stockyard of the Petitioners to the place of destination of the Petitioners' purchasers.

2. Their grievance is that, they are purchasing the sand from the Public Works Department and transporting the same based on the bills issued by the said Department and the Petitioners are using labour for processing the sand with mechanized filters for removal of stone dust and unwanted elements, making the sand fit for construction. They are owning or hiring vehicles for transporting the sand, which is stated to have been purified or processed, to the destination of purchasers at their choice with the bills issued by the Petitioners after paying the sales tax to the Government of Tamil Nadu.

3. As per Rule 36(5)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, which is as follows:

“36. General restrictions in respect of quarrying operations.—

to (4) … … …

(5)(a) and (aa) …

(5)(b). The quarrying permit-holder or the lessee shall remove, or allow removal and transportation of any mineral from the area where quarrying is permitted only after obtaining bulk transport permit and facsimiled despatch slips in the Forms prescribed [in Appendices XII, XII-A and XIII, XIII A to these Rules from the officer authorised in this behalf by the State Government, District Collector] or the District Forest Officer, as the case may be. The person who has been permitted to quarry in any area or his men, in turn, shall issue the facsimiled despatch slips to the vehicles used for removal or transportation of the mineral furnishing the particulars in the despatch slips specifically indicating the vehicle number, the quantity of the mineral allowed to be transported by the vehicle by using that despatch slip and the time of issue of the despatch slip to the vehicle. All the vehicles used for transporting any mineral from any area shall be in possession of the individual despatch slips for the quantity of the minerals available in the vehicle at all the times of transportation of the mineral by the vehicles:

Provided that the vehicles used for transporting any mineral free of charge for bona fide domestic or agricultural purpose shall have a letter of authorisation from the person for whose use the mineral is intended and the vehicle driver or owner shall be responsible for establishing the bona fide transport of the mineral for such purpose when called upon to do so.”

The permit holder shall transport minerals only after obtaining bulk transport permit and facsimile dispatch slips. Consequently, the person who has been permitted to quarry or his men shall issue facsimile dispatch slips for the vehicles used for removal or transportation of mineral, specifically indicating in the desptach slips the vehicle number, quantity of mineral allowed to be transported, etc.

4. By virtue of the amendment introduced by incorporating Rule 38-A from 01.10.2003, which is as follows:

“Rule 38-A. Quarrying of sand by the State Government.—Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules, or any order made or action taken hereunder or any judgment or decree or order of any Court, all existing leases for quarrying sand in Government lands and permissions/leases granted in Ryotwari lands shall cease to be effective on and from the date of coming into force of this Rule and the right to exploit sand in the State shall vest with the State Government to the exclusion of others. The proportionate lease amount for the unexpired period of the lease and the unadjusted seigniorage fee, if any, will be refunded.”

The Public Works Department has taken over the quarrying operations and the said Rule has also been held valid by this Court. According to the Petitioners, by paying the seigniorage, the lessee becomes the absolute owner of the mineral and the State shall not have any control over the quarried mineral.

5. It is the further case of the Petitioners that, when once the permission is granted by the Public Works Department, by sale by valid bill and the mineral is removed and transported from quarry site on payment of seinorage, there is no Governmental control thereafter over the movement of such sand from the stockyard of the Petitioners. Therefore, the above Writ Petitions have been filed with the above prayer.

6. A Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Writ Petitions in W.P Nos. 1251 of 2004, etc. batch, in the order dated 30.09.2005, held that the authorities cannot insist the Petitioners or their customers, either to obtain the transport permit or to indicate the final place of destination in the bills issued by the Public Works Department to transport the possessed/filtered sand from the stockyard of the Petitioners and accordingly, allowed the Writ Petitions filed to prohibit from insisting the Petitioners or Petitioners customers either to obtain the transport permit or to indicate the final place of destination in the bills issued by the Public Works Department to transport the processed/filtered sand from the stockyard of the Petitioners.

7. The Government filed Special Leave Petitions against the said common order passed by the Division Bench of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by condoning the delay has granted leave against the said order and the same is still pending in the Hon'ble Apex Court.

8. Since the subsequent Division Bench in W.P(MD) Nos. 3872 of 2007, etc., batch by order dated 11.07.2007, entertained certain doubts regarding the correctness of the said earlier Division Bench order, the Division Bench which has passed orders in W.P No. 1251 of 2004, etc., batch by order dated 09.10.2007 directed the matter to be placed before the Hon'ble The Chief Justice to constitute a appropriate Full Bench to consider the matter. In the mean time, identical Writ Petitions were also filed in the Principal Seat of this Court as well as the Madurai Bench and by the order of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dated 26.08.2008, those matters were directed to be posted before the Full Bench. Since, in the meantime, one of the Judges of the Full Bench has been transferred to the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, now the matter is placed before the re-constituted Full Bench, by the orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice.

9. In the meantime, the Government has issued amendment to the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 by G.O.Ms No. 32, Industries (MMC2), dated 11.02.2011, by introducing a new Rule called Rule 38-C, which is as follows:

“38-C. Storage and transportation of sand.—

(1)(a) No person shall transport sand without a valid transport permit issued by the Public Works Department or without a sale slip of license duly authenticated by the taluk headquarters Deputy Tahsildar of the jurisdiction from which the sand is transported.

(b) No person shall stock sand for sale in any place without a valid licence.

(2)(a) No person shall transport sand in any vehicle from the quarry of the Public Works Department without a transport permit issued by the Public Works Department as in Appendix XVII.

(b) No person shall transport sand in any vehicle from the stockyard without the sale slip issued by the licensee as in Appendix XVIII and duly authenticated by the taluk headquarters Deputy Tahsildar as in Appendix XIX.

(3) Any person who intends to store sand for sale shall make an Application for grant of licence in the form in Appendix XX to the District Collector concerned:

Provided that if any person who has store sand for the purpose of sale on the date of coming into force of this rule shall apply to the District Collector in the said form for grant of licence for the purpose of this Rule within sixty days from the date of coming into force of this rule.

(4) The person who makes an Application as in Appendix XX for the grant of licence, shall remit a non-refundable application fee of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the District Collector concerned.

(5) On an Application made provided that where the Application is not complete in all material particulars, or is not accompanied by the required documents, the District Collector shall return or by notice require the Applicant to supply the omission or furnish the document as the case may be within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of such notice under sub-rule (3). The District Collector may refer the said Application to the Assistant Director or the Deputy Director of Geology and Mining concerned in the district for inspection of the area and report.

(6)(a) On receipt of inspection report from the Assistant Director or the Deputy Director of Geology and Mining as the case may be, the District Collector may grant a licence in the form in Appendix XXI or for the reasons recorded in writing, refuse to grant such licence.

(b) The District Collector shall pass orders on the Application within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the Application:

Provided that the aforesaid period of thirty days shall be applicable only if the Application for licence is complete in all respects. In respect of re-submitted Applications, the said period shall be reckoned only from the date of re-submission of such Application.

(7) The period of licence shall not exceed one year from the date of grant of licence.

(8) A licence may be renewed for a period of not exceeding one year from the date of expiry of licence granted under clause (a) of sub-rule (6). The Application for renewal shall be submitted thirty days before the date of expiry of licence. The procedure specified for grant of licence and fee shall apply for renewal mutatis mutandis.

(9) When the licensee sells the sand from the stockyard, the licensee shall submit the original transport permit issued by the Public Works Department to the concerned taluk headquarters Deputy Thasildar along with the sale slip issued by him. The taluk headquarters Deputy Thasildar shall affix the seal as in Appendix XIX on the quantum of sale slip which is equivalent of the quantum of sand transported with the Public Works Department transport permit slip and also make necessary endorsement on the original transport permit submitted by the licensee.

(10) Every licensee shall submit a monthly return as in Appendix XXII to the District Collector before 10th of succeeding month.

(11) Non-possession of transport permit or sale slip for transport of the sand shall be construed as illicit transportation of sand.

(12) Whenever any person stocks the sand or transports or causes to be transported the sand without any lawful authority, and for that purpose uses any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, such sand, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing shall be liable to be seized by the Competent Authorities and shall also liable for confiscation of the same. For such confiscation, the Competent Authorities shall make a Complaint in this behalf before the competent Court. Before making such Complaint, the Competent Authorities shall obtain specific sanction of the District Collector, for making such a Complaint.

(13) The Taluk Headquarters Deputy Tahsildar who authenticates the sale slip shall maintain a day book register, indicating date wise number of authentication made by him, to whom it has been made and the quantum of sand for which sale slips are issued and such other particulars as are required.

(14) The Taluk Headquarer Deputy Tahsildar at the end of each month shall prepare and submit a return on the number of sale slips authenticated, to whom it has been issued and the quantum of sand covered therein to the District Collector concerned and such return shall be submitted before 10th of succeeding month.

(15) If any violation of condition of licence is found, the District Collector concerned shall cancel the licence after affording an opportunity of hearing to the licensee.”

The said new Rule also contains Appendix Nos. XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI and XXII to the Rules. A combined reading of the newly introduced Rule 38-C along with the above said Appendices show that a prohibition is imposed on the person transporting sand without valid transport permit. The prohibition is imposed on a person to stock the sand for sale without valid license and as per Appendix XVII, without a transport permit issued by the Public Works Department, to transport sand in any vehicle from the quarry place of the Public Works Department. That apart, under Appendix XVIII, a prohibition is imposed on a person to transport sand in any vehicle from the stockyard without sale slip issued by the licensee. As per Appendix XIX, the sale slip issued by the licensee at the stockyard shall contain the name of the person to whom the sand is to be transported from the stock yard and the said form in Appendix XVIII which is as follows:

“Appendix XVIII

[See Rule 38-C(2)(b)

SALE SLIP ISSUED BY THE LICENSEE AT THE STOCKYARD

Book No.Permit Slip Number:

Name and address of the licensee:

License Number and date:

Expiry date:

Officer who authenticates the sale slip:

1. (i) Name of the person to whom the sand is sold:

(ii) Place to which sand is transported:

(iii) Quantum of sand transported (number of units/cubic meters) from the stockyard:

(iv) Balance quantum of sand at the stockyard:

(v) Approximate time to be taken to reach the destination:

(vi) Registration Number of the vehicle transporting the sand:

(vii) Departure time of the vehicle from the stockyard:

(viii) Name and signature of the driver of the vehicle transporting the sand:

2.(i) Signature of the licensee or person authorised by the licensee at the stockyard of licensee:

(ii) Date and time of issue of sale slip to the driver of the vehicle :”

There must be the seal of Taluk Headquarters Deputy Tahsildar on the backside of the sale slip as found in the Form of Appendix XIX, which is as follows:

“Appendix XIX

[See Rule 38-C(2)(b)]

FORM OF THE SEAL OF TALUK HEADQUARTERS DEPUTY TAHSILDAR TO BE AFFIXED AT THE BACK OF THE SALE SLIP ISSUED BY LICENSEE

1. Name of the Licensee:

2. Licence Number and date:

3. Validity period:

4. Permit Number and Date:

5. Signature with Office seal:

6. Date of issue:”

Therefore, by virtue of the subsequent Rule, which has come into effect by way of amendment to the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, a statutory duty is imposed on the purchasers of sand from the Public Works Department, who store the same in the stockyard to issue sale slip to remove it from the stockyard to subsequent purchasers and such sale slip should be attested by the Headquarters Deputy Tahsildar under seal. Therefore, there is an embargo or restriction upon the movement of the processed sand even from the stockyard to the place of purchasers.

10. In such circumstances, by virtue of the amendment imposing such obligation on the part of the purchasers from the Public Works Department to store it in the stockyard, to obtain further sale slip authenticated by the Taluk Headquarters Deputy Tahsildar, the prayer of the Petitioners in these Writ Petitions to forbear the Respondents from insisting the Petitioners and their customers to obtain transport permit or to get mentioning the final place of destination in the bill issued by the Public Works Department to transport the processed or filtered or raw sand from the stockyard of the Petitioners to the place of destination of Petitioners' purchasers cannot be granted. If the Petitioners have any grievance against the newly introduced Rule 38-C, it is for them to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.

11. In such circumstances, the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that in view of issuance of notice by the Hon'ble Apex Court against the judgment of the Division Bench, the original order dated 20.09.2005 in W.P No. 1251 of 2004, etc., batch got merged cannot be accepted and by virtue of the change effected by the Government in the Rules, no Mandamus could be issued in these Writ Petitions as on date and therefore, the Writ Petitions are dismissed as really become infructuous. Accordingly, the Petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

In view of the above order, the reference stands closed.

D. Sivakumar v. District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri

Concise Structured Summary of the Provided Opinion

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioners' Arguments

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

D. Sivakumar v. District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri

Comments