TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the various contentions raised by learned senior counsel on either side on merits of the case, especially w.r.t. the issuance of the suspension orders and the show cause notices. It was also noticed that the Division Bench of the High Court has issued some equitable directions taking into consideration the interest of the workers and also for honouring some statutory obligations of the petitioner firm. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and the special leave petitions filed against those orders stand dismissed. - SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS.18662-18663 OF 2013 - - - Dated:- 13-12-2013 - RADHAKRISHNAN,K.S. AND SIKRI, A.K., JJ. J U D G M E N T K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. These Special Leave Petitions arise out of a common judgment and order dated 15.2.2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.A. (MD) Nos.906 and 907 of 2012. The Petitioner is a registered partnership firm, engaged in the manufacture of dimensional granite blocks, slabs, tiles, monuments etc. and has set up its factory for cutting and polishing of granite in Therkkutheru Village, Madurai District. The Petitioner firm, it is stated, is 100% export ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der to settle equity, these writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions:- 1. The respondents shall permit the petitioner to continue the quarry operations over the leased property strictly in terms of the lease, which is admittedly in force. It shall be, however, open to the respondents to take appropriate action by following due process of law under The Mines Minerals (Development Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Rules framed thereunder, if so advised ; 2. The respondents shall henceforth release the bank accounts and to allow the petitioner to carry on his business in accordance with law. However, it shall be the duty of the petitioners to submit fortnightly Statement of Accounts to the Investigating Officer; 3. That the order restraining the export and import by the Investigating Officer is ordered to be quashed and it is directed that the respondents shall not interfere in the export and import on valid documents by the petitioner. 4. That the seal of the administrative building be opened, after the Investigating Officer takes in possession of the documents, the computers, hard discs, etc., required for investigation. (As agreed between the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1978) 1 SCC 405]. 6. The Division Bench of the Madras High Court formulated two questions which read as follows : (1) Whether the appellants can place reliance on the subsequent events, viz., passing of the suspension orders dated 14.12.2012 and the issuance of the show cause notice dated Nil.12.2012 to the respondents/writ petitioners firm? and (2) Whether the provisions under the Special Law viz. The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and other Rules, can override the General Law, viz., the penal provisions under the Indian Penal Code and the provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of the initiation of parallel proceedings, viz., departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings? 7. Shri Harish Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that he is more concerned with the first question and arguments were advanced by him as well as Shri C. Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing for the State, on that point. In our view, the Division Bench of the High Court is right in examining the subsequent events as well in a case where larger public interest is involved. This Court in All India Railway Recruitm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elonged to the Petitioner. 9. The Deputy Director and the Assistant Director of Geology and Mining in their Evaluation Report dated 23.11.2012 reported that the Petitioner firm has not carried out the quarrying operations as per their mining plan and encroached upon the adjoining roads, tanks, channels and water bodies and illicitly quarried granites in the adjacent non-leasehold areas also. Further, it was also pointed out that there is a vast difference between the quantity permitted by the District Mines office and the quantity quarried by the Petitioner firm. Consequently, it was pointed out that they have violated Section 4-(1) and 4-(1A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Further, it was also pointed out that they have not maintained the boundary stones and the safety distance and thus violated the Rules 36(4) and 36(1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. It was also pointed out that the Petitioner has not submitted the Scheme of Mining as per Rules 15 and 18 of the Granite Conservation and Development Rules, 1999 and has not stored the over burden and waste materials as earmarked. Various other violations have also been p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the volume of illegal transportation from the petitioners 16 quarries is around 1207863.164 Cubic Meters and show cause notices have been issued to the Petitioner firm under Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 for recovery of the cost. It is stated that the value of the illicit quarry in the 16 quarries alone comes around 4124.14 crores. Further, it was also pointed out that other quarry operators have also indulged in similar illegal quarry operations and the total volume of illegal operations is estimated around ₹ 12390.460 crores. Further, it was also pointed out that several criminal cases are also pending for carrying on illegal quarrying operations in the government land. 13. We are of the view that, since several writ petitions are pending consideration before the High Court, at this stage, it would not be appropriate to pronounce upon the various contentions raised by learned senior counsel on either side on merits of the case, especially in the light of the materials leading to the issuance of the suspension orders dated 14.12.2012 and the show cause notices dated Nil.12.2012. We also notice that the Division Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
