Madras High Court
M/S.Chettinad Morimura Semiconductor vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 1 March, 2024
W.P(MD)No.10636 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 01.03.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
W.P(MD)No.10636 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD)No.8292 of 2021
M/s.Chettinad Morimura Semiconductor
Material Private Limited,
Rep.its Company Secretary,
V.G.Vimhalesh,
Registered Office at No.37,
Old Mahabalipuram Road,
Kazhipattur Village, Thiruporur Taluk,
Chengalpattu District 603 103. : Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep.by Secretary to Government,
Industries Department,
Fort st.George,
Chennai 600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Karur.
3.The State Level Environmental-
Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA)
Rep.by its Chairman,
3rd Floor, Panagal Maligai,
No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet,
Chennai 600 015. : Respondents
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.10636 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of certiorari, to call for the
records of the second respondent relating to the demand notice
Na.Ka.No.438/Minerals/2019, dated 02.08.2019 pertaining to the
petitioner's patta lands measuring an extent of 3.54.5 Hectares in
S.F.Nos.1216/1A, 1222/A2, 1222/B2 and 1223/2B situated at
Nagampalli Village, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District and quash the
same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vasudevan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Thambidurai,
Government Advocate for R1 and R2
: Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, for R3.
ORDER
The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of certiorari, to call
for the records of the second respondent relating to the demand notice
Na.Ka.No.438/Minerals/2019, dated 02.08.2019 pertaining to the
petitioner's patta lands measuring an extent of 3.54.5 Hectares in
S.F.Nos.1216/1A, 1222/A2, 1222/B2 and 1223/2B situated at
Nagampalli Village, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District and quash the
same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that while
application has been pending in the Ministry of Environment and Forest,
the second respondent without considering the same and without passing
any order therein, has issued a demand notice on 02.08.2019 claiming
Rs.1,21,830/- for the period from 15.01.2016 to 11.02.2016 ; that the
demand notice was issued without giving notice and without hearing the
petitioner; that the demand notice is in reality an order requiring the
petitioner to pay the amount mentioned therein and that therefore, the
petitioner was constrained to approach this Court, challenging the
impugned order dated 02.08.2019.
3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that the present case is squarely
covered by the judgment of the first Bench of this Court headed by the
Hon'ble Chief Justice in Writ Appeal No.671 of 2020 and batch of
appeals and Writ Petition.No.31399 of 2018 and batch of petitions and
also produced a copy of the common judgment, dated 15.02.2024,
wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench has observed that the learned
learned Single Judge at Madurai Bench of Madras High Court had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
decided to allow the writ petitions on the ground that the principles of
natural justice were not followed and the learned Single Judge at
Principal Seat had taken a different view, had referred the matters and
whereas another learned single Judge at Principal Seat had decided that
since the petitioner therein continued with the mining operations from
15.01.2016 to 10.01.2017 without obtaining Environmental Clearance,
the authority was justified in imposing penalty and/or recovering the
100% cost of the mineral lifted during the said period, have taken the
above matters and passed the common judgment and the result portion is
extracted hereunder :
“28. In the result, we pass the following orders:
(i) The impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge
at the Principal Seat is quashed and set aside;
(ii) The impugned orders/memos imposing 100%
penalty/cost upon the appellants/petitioners shall be construed as
show-cause notices;
(iii) The appellants/petitioners shall file reply to the said
show-cause notices, along with all the relevant documents on
which they rely, within a period of four weeks from today; and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(iv) The authority shall consider the reply filed by the
appellants/petitioners individually and pass fresh orders with
regard to imposing of penalty/cost or otherwise.”
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned
Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents would
submit that the present case is squarely covered by the above judgment.
5. In view of the above, the impugned notice, dated 02.08.2019 is
set aside and the impugned notice or order shall be taken as a show cause
notice and the petitioner shall file reply to the said show cause notice
along with all relevant documents within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order and on receipt of such reply, the
authorities shall consider the reply filed by the petitioner and pass fresh
orders with regard to impose of penalty/cost or otherwise.
6. This Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
01.03.2024
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/ No
das
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep.by Secretary to Government,
Industries Department,
Fort st.George,
Chennai 600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Karur.
3.The State Level Environmental-
Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA)
Rep.by its Chairman,
3rd Floor, Panagal Maligai,
No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet,
Chennai 600 015.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J
das
Order made in
and
Dated : 01.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
