BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27/06/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.(MD)No.5691 of 2008 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2008 P.Hendry ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chairman / Managing Director Arasu Rubber Corporation Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai. 2.The Divisional Manager Keeripparai Division, Arasu Rubber Corporation Keeripparai & Post, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the petitioner's inter crops permit in respect of the property in coup No.11 beat 1B, Paraliar Section, Keeripparai Division to an extent of 10.28 hectares for a further period of 6 months. !For Petitioner ... Mr.C.K.M.Appaji ^For Respondents... Mr.Pala.Ramasamy Special Government Pleader :ORDER
Mr.Pala.Ramasamy, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on
behalf of the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final
disposal.
2.In the land belonging to the Government, Arasu Rubber Corporation
constituted by the Government for planting rubber trees in mountain area is
entitled to issue permits. In the year 2003, the Corporation has issued permit
to the petitioner to cultivate inter crops in coup number 11 bear 1B, Paraliar
Section to an extent of 10.28 hectares. Accordingly, the petitioner has planted
Pineapple plants and has also invested huge amount in respect of the said inter
crops plantation and also obtained loan from the State Bank of India. It is not
in dispute that the original permit granted to the petitioner was for a period
of two years and that was extended by one year and ultimately, the first
respondent in his letter dated 28.04.2006 has extended the lease period up to
30.09.2006.
3.The admitted case of the petitioner is that, after 30.09.2006 the
petitioner has not been permitted. However, the crops are still in their field
even though, the permit was not extended and the first respondent is taking
steps to remove the inter crops.
4.On the other hand, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for
the respondents, by referring to the proceedings dated 28.04.2006 of the Rubber
Corporation also would submit that after 30.09.2006, the lease period was never
extended and in fact in respect of the persons who have been carrying on
plantation of inter crops among the rubber estate have been removed by the first
respondent Department. Even, in respect of the petitioner’s crops, half of them
have already been removed and in spite of it, the petitioner has not taken any
steps to remove the remaining portion of inter crops.
5.It is the further case of the respondents that the Corporation has
removed almost all the persons who have done the plantation of inter crops among
the rubber estate and the petitioner has no right to continue there. A reference
to the receipt dated 26.07.2006 shows that finally, the permit given to the
petitioner was extended upto 30.09.2006 after receiving the minimum receipt of
Rs.4,283/-.
6.While it is the admitted case of the petitioner that thereafter the
permission was not extended, the petitioner has no right to continue in
possession of the same. In view of the same, the present writ petition fails and
the same is dismissed. It is made clear that in the event of the petitioner not
removing the portion of inter crops, the first respondent shall give fifteen
days time to remove the same and if the balance crop has not been removed as
stated above, it is open to the first respondent to take further action.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
tk/mpk
To
1.The Chairman / Managing Director
Arasu Rubber Corporation
Panagal Building,
Saidapet,
Chennai.
2.The Divisional Manager
Keeripparai Division,
Arasu Rubber Corporation
Keeripparai & Post,
Kanyakumari District.