WP No.

1592 of 2015

The Hon`ble The CHIEF JUSTICE

and
The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN

CONVERTED AS SUO-MOTU PIL

... and 2 others.
Vs
Union of India,
Rep. by the Secreatry to Government,
Government of India, Ministry of Mines,
d Wing, 3rd Flr, Shastri Bhavan, New
Delhi-1. and 26 others.

We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for respondents 8 and 22.
However, unfortunately, the learned Additional Solicitor General is not available
and the normal required courtesy by the counsel on record to indicate it so ought
to have been observed. Be that as it may, from a perusal of our order dated
22.07.2016, more specifically, para 4, we find that there is a submission made by
the learned Additional Solicitor General in the conspectus of what the submission
was made by the learned Amicus. We extract it as under:
``4. ... He, further, submits that in the context of the submission made by
the learned Amicus, possibly an inspection of the area may be required as the
presence of monozite itself would require certain other aspects of verification
inter alia the area where the mining has been carried on.``
2.The second respondent till date has not taken a categorical stand in this
behalf and is required to do so. Thus, an affidavit in this behalf be filed within
two (2) weeks.

3.A status report has also been filed by the learned Amicus in Court and on
the leave of Court, copies have been handed over to all the parties.

4.We have heard the learned Amicus at some length. We are, of course,
conscious of the fact that respondents 8 and 22 may have their own say on the
contents of the report. However, some aspects can be adverted to and directions
are passed today.
5.There is undoubtedly sea of litigations being initiated in different Courts
broadly arising from the same issue. Learned counsel on record for the aforesaid
two respondents and the learned Amicus can sit down together to work out as to
which of these suits or writ petitions are really liable to be maintained in view
of the broader conspectus being brought before this Court and thus, the Courts are
not unnecessarily burdened by different suits and writ proceedings and the
possibility of conflict of orders.
6.Learned Amicus has emphasized that post 2013, the mining was prohibited and
transport licenses not issued. Thus, there could be no issue of even mining of
other beach sand minerals. In this behalf, he submits that the export of Garnet
and Ilmenite especially from the Port of Tuticorin is a matter of concern as to
where these minerals are actually coming from.
7.Learned Senior Counsel for respondents 8 and 22, on instructions, states
that these exports arise from bonded warehouses where royalty has already been
paid.
8.We have also examined the directions which the learned Amicus has sought
for in his report dated 21.11.2016. We are inclined to issue direction No.5 for
impleadment of parties, i.e., (i)Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise,
Thoothukudi Port; (ii)Regional Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Chennai;
and (iii)Chairman, VO Chidambaranar Port Trust, Thoothukudi, and the memo of
parties be amended accordingly, with notice being issued and accepted by the
learned Central Government Standing Counsel, Mr.Rabu Manohar. Learned Assistant
Solicitor General undertakes to inform the learned counsel.
9.In respect of direction sought for at Sl.No.9, respondents 8 and 22 to
furnish the said requisite information to the second respondent / DAE within two
(2) weeks and the DAE, in turn, to file the necessary affidavit before us within
two (2) weeks thereafter.
10.In so far as direction nos.6, 7 and 8 are concerned, we are of the view
that an opportunity must be given to respondents 8 and 22 or any other affected
before we pass the necessary direction in this behalf.
11.In so far as direction no.10 is concerned, we call upon the learned
Advocate General to file before us the report stated to have been prepared, but not
submitted by Mr.Gagandeep Singh Bedi, Revenue Secretary, in respect of Tirunelveli
and Kanyakumari Districts, subject to what the respondents have to say in this
behalf.

12.List on 11.01.2017.

[CJ] [R M D J]

21/11/2016

SRA
http://www.judis.nic.in