Case Note & Summary
The petitioners operated a live stone crusher unit and quarry in Periyappati Village, Namakkal. They apprehended that the respondent authorities might grant building permissions or layout approvals within a prohibited distance of 500 meters from the stone crusher unit and 300 meters from the quarry site, allegedly in violation of applicable rules. They submitted representations dated 10.06.2024 and 19.11.2024 to the second respondent (Assistant Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning) raising objections. When no action was taken, they filed Writ Petition No. 9319 of 2025 under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Madras High Court, praying for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider their representations and forbearing all respondents from granting any building permission or layout approval within the said distances. The Division Bench noted that the writ petition was based merely on an apprehension and that the authorities must scrupulously follow the applicable statutes and rules. The court held that when a decision is to be taken by competent authorities in a particular locality, seeking a negative response by submitting a representation does not warrant judicial intervention through a writ petition. There was no demonstration of any actual or imminent violation of legal rights or statutory obligations. Consequently, the writ petition was found not entertainable and was dismissed without costs. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed. The judgment reiterates that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued on the basis of a speculative fear; the petitioner must establish a clear legal right and a corresponding duty on the part of the authorities, which the court found lacking in this case.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Maintainability and Scope - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Petition seeking mandamus to direct authorities to consider representation and forbear granting building permissions within prohibited distance near stone crusher unit and quarry - Court held that authorities are expected to scrupulously follow applicable statutes and rules; seeking a negative response by submitting a representation does not, by itself, warrant judicial intervention - Held: The writ petition, being based on mere apprehension, is not entertainable and was dismissed (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus lies to direct authorities to consider a representation and forbear from granting building permissions within a prohibited distance based on a mere apprehension.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed as not entertainable, with no costs. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus not maintainable for mere apprehension
- authorities must follow applicable statutes and rules
- seeking negative response by submitting representation does not warrant judicial intervention
