{"id":217002,"date":"2008-04-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008"},"modified":"2015-02-06T07:18:06","modified_gmt":"2015-02-06T01:48:06","slug":"s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","title":{"rendered":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 01\/04\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.BANUMATI\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR\n\nW.P(MD)No. 2766 Of 2008\nand\nW.P.M.P.(MD)No.1 Of 2008\n\n\nS.Shenbagavalli\t\t\t      ..Petitioner\n\nvs.\n\n\n$1. The District Collector,\n   Theni District,\n   Theni.\n\n2. The Assistant Director of Geology\n   and Mines,Theni.    \t\t              ..Respondents.\n\nPRAYER\n\nWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,\npraying to issue a Writ of  Mandamus directing the respondents particularly the\nfirst respondent to stop the auction proceeding for stone quarry for the site\nunder Survey No.2202\/1(PartIV) to an extent of 10.67 hectares situated at\nAllinagaram Village, Theni District notified by the first respondent  in the\nGazette under Na.Ka.No.242\/2008\/Minerals, dated20.2.2008 by considering the\nrepresentation dated 19.03.2008 made to the first respondent within a time frame\nfixed  by this Court.\n\n!For Petitioner   ... Mr.V.Janakiramulu\n\n^For Respondents  ... Mr.Pala Ramasamy\n\t1&2           Special G.P\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY HIS LORDSHIP
\n                        S.MANIKUMAR)<\/p>\n
\tThe petitioner has sought for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents
\nparticularly, the first respondent to stop the auction proceedings for stone
\nquarrying for a site in S.No.2202\/1(PartIV) to an extent of 10.67 hectares
\nsituated at Allinagaram Village, Theni District notified by the first respondent
\nin the Gazette under Na.Ka.No.242\/2008\/Minerals, dated 20.2.2008, by considering
\nthe representation dated:19.03.2008 made to the first respondent within a time
\nframe fixed  by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.  It is the case of the petitioner that she owns lands in Theni
\nDistrict, Bodi Taluk, Boothipuram Village in Survey No.261\/13, 262\/7, 266\/2 and
\n307\/13B.  The lands are  fertile and there are  mango trees.  The lands adjacent
\nto the petitioner’s land are owned by other agriculturists who are cultivating
\nSugarcane, groundnut and other commercial crops.  The Government dry lands in
\nS.No.2202\/1 adjacent to petitioner’s agricultural lands were notified for
\ngranting lease for stone quarry and the date of auction was fixed on 25.3.2008.
\nThe quarry site proposed to be leased, to an extent of 10.67 hectares in
\nS.lNo.2202\/1(PartIV) in Allinagaram, Theni District is listed as Item No.3 in
\nthe Gazette notification. The villagers have raised their objection to the
\nlocation of the quarry site.  Though the petitioner has sent a representation
\ndated 19.3.2008 to the District Collector, Theni District to take immediate
\naction to stop the tender-cum-auction to be held on 25.3.2008, the first
\nrespondent has not passed any orders and therefore the petitioner left with no
\nother option, has approached this Honourable Court for the relief as stated
\nsupra.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. Referring to rule 36(1)(a) of the Tamilnadu Minor Mineral Concession
\nRules, 1959, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though there
\nis a positive prohibition under the rules that there should not be any stone
\nquarrying site within 300 metres from any inhabitated site, the respondents have
\narbitrarily earmarked the said site, which would affect the cultivable lands,
\nirrigation canal and public road in the viscinity of the site.  The learned
\ncounsel for the petitioner further submitted that when Rule 36 of Minor Mineral
\nConcession Rules 1959  contemplates that stone quarrying site should not be
\nlocated within the prohibited distance of 50 metres from a public road or canal,
\nthe statutory authorities, have ignored the scheme of the rules.  It is also the
\ngrievance of the petitioner that the first respondent has acknowledged the
\nrepresentation of the petitioner dated 19.3.2008, he has not chosen to pass any
\norders.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.  On the other hand, Mr.Pala Ramasamy, the learned Special Government
\nPleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions submitted that as per
\nrule 8[10-A(a))] of the Taminadu Minor Mineral Concession Rule,notification has
\nbeen issued by the District Collector, Theni District inviting applications for
\ngrant of quarry lease to Co-operative Societies registered under the Tamil Nadu
\nCo-operative Societies Act,1983(Swarna Jayanthi Gram Swarozgar Yojana Scheme
\nGroups)and that there is no proposal to conduct any auction for grant of lease.
\nHe submitted that  S.No.2202\/1 is comprised of five parts, each measuring
\n10.67.5 hectares of Government Poromboke land.  He further submitted that  out
\nof  five parts in Survey No.2202\/1 in Allinagaram village, the petitioner’s
\nhusband  is quarrying in in S.No.2201\/1(Part III),which is also located closer
\nto the petitioner’s agricultural lands, for which the petitioner has not made
\nany objections, Whereas, when quarrying of lease was proposed to be given to a
\nCo-operative Society viz., Swarna Jayanthi Gram Swarozgar yojana Scheme Group,
\nthe petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition objecting to location of
\nthe quarry site. He further submitted the grievance expressed by the petitioner
\nreflects only his private interest and that there is not even a iota of evidence
\nor material to infer any public interest. For the abovesaid reasons, counsel for
\nthe State prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.  Before adverting to the facts of this case, it is necessary to extract
\nthe relevant of rules of the Tamil Nadu Minor Minerals Concession Rules,1959 for
\nthe purpose of proper adjudication of the dispute. Rule 8[(10-A)(a)] reads as
\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n
\tNotwithstanding anything contrary contained in this rule, the District
\nCollector shall, by notification in the District Gazette published in the month
\nof April every year, call for applications for direct grant of lease of stone
\nquarries to the (Swarna Jayanthi Gram Swarozgar Yojana Scheme Groups(hereinafter
\ncalled SGSY groups)registered either under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies
\nAct,1983(Tamil Nadu Act 30 of 1983) or under the Tamil Nadu Societies
\nRegistration Act,1975 (Tamil Nadu Act 27 of 1975) and the societies formed by
\nreleased bonded labourers, subject to certain conditions.”\n<\/p>\n
\t6. The general restrictions in respect of quarrying operations by the
\npermit holder or lessee as stated in rule 36 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral
\nconcessions rules, 1959 is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t“36. General restrictions in respect of quarrying operations:-
\n\t(1) The quarrying permit holder or the lessee or their men shall not work
\nor carry on or allow to be worked or carried on any mining operations at or to
\nany point within a distance of 50 metres from any railway line except with the
\nprevious written permission of the Railway administration concerned or under or
\nbeneath any ropeway or any ropeway trestle or station except under and in
\naccordance with the written permission of the authority owning the ropeway or
\nfrom any reservoir, canal or other public works such as public roads and
\nbuildings except with the previous written permission of the Collector of the
\nDistrict or any other officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf
\nand otherwise than in accordance with such instructions, restrictions and
\nconditions, either general or special, which may be attached to such permission.
\nThe said distance of 50 metres shall be measured in the case of railway,
\nreservoir or canal horizontally from the outer toe of the bank or the outer edge
\nof the cutting, as the case may be, and in case of building horizontally from
\nthe plinth thereof.  In the case of village roads, no working shall be carried
\nout within a distance of 10 metres and except with the previous permission of
\nthe Collector of the district or any other officer duly authorised by the State
\nGovernment in this behalf and otherwise than in accordance with such directions,
\nrestrictions and additions, either general or special, which may be attached to
\nsuch permission:\n<\/p>\n
\tProvided that notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time
\nbeing in force or any provision in any lease deed or agreement already executed
\nunder these rules, there shall be no quarrying of sand in any river bed or
\nadjoining area or any other area which is located within 500 metres radial
\ndistances from the location of any bridge, water supply system, infiltration
\nwell or pumping installation of any of the local bodies or Central or State
\nGovernment Department or the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board head
\nworks or any area identified for locating water supply schemes by any of the
\nabove mentioned Government Departments or other bodies.
\n\t(1-A)(a) No lease shall be granted for quarrying stone within 300 metres
\n(three hundred metres) from any inhabited site:\n<\/p>\n
\tProvided that the existing quarries which are subsisting under current
\nleases shall be entitled for continuance till the expiry of the lease period.
\nThe lessees whose quarries lie within a radius of 300 metres from the inhabited
\nsite shall undertake blasting operations only after getting permission of the
\nDirector of Mines Safety, Corgaum:’
\n\tProvided further that the new and existing units of quarries shall also be
\nrequired to comply with the pollution control measures [(i.e.,) dust control
\nmeasures] besides complying with the other conditions in regard to Pollution
\nControl Measures.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) The Methodology specified in column (2) of the Table shall be adopted
\nin respect of the operational sources specified in column (1) thereof for rock
\nquarrying operations.\n<\/p>\n
TABLE
\nSl.No
\nOperational sources
\nMethodology to be adopted for controlling the dust
\n  (  1 )
\n (  2  )
\n(  3  )
\n1<\/span>
\nDrilling
\nLiquid injection (water with a wetting agent) of capturing and venting emissions
\nto a control device.\n<\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
Blasting
\nAdoption of good blasting practices
\n3<\/span>
\nLoading (at mines)
\nWater wetting
\n4<\/span>
\nTransport
\nWatering treatment with surface agents, soil stabilization on paving.\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) No new layout, building plans falling within 300 metres from any
\nquarry should be given approval by any agency unless prior clearance of the
\nDirector of Geology and Mining is obtained.  On receipt of proposals for
\naccording clearance, the Director of Geology and Mining shall decide upon the
\ncontinuance or closure, as the case may be, of any quarry which is situated
\nwithin 300 metres from the new layout, buildings sought for such clearance.”\n<\/p>\n
\t24.\tFor the purpose of Rule 1(1-A) “Inhabited site” is explained in
\nClause (iii) of Rule 36 sub-Rule (c ), “Inhabited site” shall mean village site,
\ntown site or House site as referred to the revenue records or a house site or
\nlayout approved by a Local Body or Town or Country or Metropolitan Planning
\nAuthority, where the said Body or Authority is created under a statute and
\nempowered to approve such an area as a house site or lay-out area.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. Inhabitated site means, a village site, town site or house site as
\nreferred to the revenue records or a house site  or lay out approved by a local
\nbody or town or country or metropolitan authority where the said body or
\nauthority is correct in a statute and empowered to approve such an area as a
\nhouse site or lay out area.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.  Examination of the definition “inhabited site” under rule 36(1-
\nA)(C)(iii) of the rules, would make it clear that it has two parts (1) site
\nshould be a village site or town site or house site as referred to in the
\nrevenue records;(2) a house or lay out approved by a local body town or country
\nor metropolitan authority where the said body or authority is correct in statute
\nand empowered to approve such an area as a house site or lay out area.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.  It is evident from the pleadings and the Adangal, appended to the
\ntyped set of papers that the lands owned by the petitioner in Survey Nos.261\/13,
\n262\/7, 266\/2 and 307\/13B said to have been located adjacent to the dry lands in
\nS.No.2201\/1, earmarked, are agricultural lands, and does not fall within the
\ndefinition house site.  A reading of Rule 36 in entirety does not communicate
\nthat there is any prohibition of locating a quarry site nearer to an
\nagricultural land and the restrictions placed on the authority are that it
\nshould not be located with a distance of 50 metres from any railway land except
\nwith the previous written permission of the railway administration concerned or
\nunder ropeway or ropeway tussle or station except under and in accordance with
\nthe written permission of the authority the ropeway or from any reservoir, Canal
\nor other public road, building with the previous written permission of the
\nCollector of the District or any other officer  authorised by the State in this
\nbehalf.\n<\/p>\n
\t10. Excepting the averments made in the Writ petition, the petitioner has
\nnot furnished any details of the existence of a canal or road within the
\nprohibited distance.  Even in the representation dated 19.3.2008 submitted to
\nthe District Collector, Theni District, there is no reference to either a canal
\nor road within the prohibited distance of quarry site. The apprehension of the
\npetitioner in the said representation  is that, if S.No.2202\/1 (Part IV) is
\nearmarked to be a  quarry Site, it would cause damage to the agricultural lands
\nsituated nearer to the site.\n<\/p>\n
\t11. In a recent decision Holicow pictures Private Limited .vs. Prem
\nChandra Mishra and others reported in (2008) 1 MLJ 1075, the Supreme Court has
\nagain reiterated the principles to be followed by courts in dealing  with Public
\nInterest Litigations.  The Apex Court has defined the scope and extent of the
\nexercise of jurisdiction in dealing with such litigations. At Paragraph
\n10,17,18,20 the Supreme Court has held  as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t10…Public interest litigation which has now come to occupy an important
\nfield in the administration of law should not be “publicity interest litigation”
\nor “private interest litigation” or Politics interest litigation”. If not
\nproperly regulated and abuse adverted, it becomes also a tool in unscrupulous
\nhands to relase vendetta and wreak vengeance, as well.  There must be real and
\ngenuine public interest involved in  the litigation  and not merely an adventure
\nor knight errant borne out of wishful thinking.  It cannot also be invoked by a
\nperson or a body of persons to further his or their personal grudge and enmity.
\nCourts of justice should not be allowed to be polluted by unscrupulous litigants
\nby resorting to the extraordinary jurisdiction….”\n<\/p>\n
\t17. .. It is depressing to note that on account of such trumpery
\nproceedings initiated before the Courts, innumerable days are wasted , the time
\nwhich otherwise could have been spent for disposal of cases of the genuine
\nlitigants…”\n<\/p>\n
\t“..the busy bodies, meddlesome interlopers, wayfarers or officious
\ninterveners having absolutely no public interest except for personal gain or
\nprivate profit either of themselves or as a proxy of others or for any other
\nextraneous motivation or for glare of publicity break the queue muffing their
\nfaces by wearing the mask of public interest litigation and get into the Courts
\nby filing vexatious and frivolous petitions and thus criminally waste the
\nvaluable time of the Courts and as a result of which the queue standing outside
\nthe doors of the courts never moves, which piquant situation creates frustration
\nin the minds of the genuine litigants and resultantly they loose faith in the
\nadministration of our judicial system.”\n<\/p>\n
\t“18. Public interest litigatilon is a weapon which has tobe used  with
\ngreat care and circumspection and the judiciary has to be extremely careful to
\nsee that behind the beautiful veil of public interest an ugly private malice,
\nvested interest and\/or publicity seeking is not lurking.  It is to be used as an
\neffective weapon in the armory of law for delivering social justice to the
\ncitizens. The attractive brand name of public interest litigation should not be
\nused for suspicious products of mischief.  It should be aimed at redressal of
\ngenuine public oriented or founded on personal vendetta.  As indicated above,
\nCourts must be careful to see that a body of persons or member of public, who
\napproaches the Court is acting bonafide and not for personal gain or private
\nmotive or political motivation or other oblique considerations.  The Court must
\nnot allow its process to be abused for oblique considerations by masked phantoms
\nwho monitor at times from behind.  Some persons with vested interest indulge in
\nthe pastime of medding with judicial process either by force of habit or from
\nimproper motives and  try to bargain for a good deal as well to enrich
\nthemselves.  Often they are actuated by a desire to win notoriety or cheap
\npopularity.  The petitions of such busy bodies deserve to be thrown out by
\nrejection at the threshold, and in appropriate cases with exemplary costs.”
\n\t“20. The Court has to be satisfied about (a) the credentials of the
\napplicant:(b) the Prima facie correctness or nature of information given by
\nhim:(c) the information being not vague and indefinite. The information should
\nshow gravity and seriousness involved. Court has to strike balance between two
\nconflicting interests: (1) nobody should be allowed to indulge in wild and
\nreckless allegations besmirching the character  of others; and (ii)avoidance of
\npublic mischief and to avoid mischievous petitions seeking to assail, for
\noblique motives, justifiable executive actions.  In such case, however, the
\nCourt cannot afford to be liberal.  It has to be extremely careful to see that
\nunder the guise of redressing a public grievance it does not encroach upon the
\nsphere reserved by the constitution to the executive and the Legislature.  The
\ncourt has to act ruthlessly while dealing with impostors and busy bodies or
\nmeddlesome interlopers impesonating as public-spirited holy men.  They
\nmasquerade as crusaders of justice.  They pretend to act in the name of Pro Bobo
\nPublico, though they have no interest of the public or even of their own
\ninterest.”\n<\/p>\n
\t12.It is apparent that when the petitioner’s husband is quarrying in
\nS.No.2201\/1Part III, land situated closer to the agricultural lands owned by the
\npetitioner,as well as  others, there was no objection, whereas, the petitioner,
\nunder the banner of Public Interest Litigation, with malafide and private motive
\nhas sought for a Mandamus  to forbear the respondents from leasing the quarry
\nsite to the Societies of bonded labourers. The objection of the petitioner is
\nnot bonafide. No public interest is involved in this Writ Petition. The
\nPrinciples laid down by the Supreme Court is squarely applicable to the facts of
\nthis case.\n<\/p>\n
\t13. In the circumstances, we do not find that the  petitioner has made out
\nsufficient grounds and satisfied the requirements for issuance of a Writ of
\nMandamus.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the result, Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected
\nMiscellaneous Petition is closed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
vsn<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1. The District Collector,
\n   Theni District,
\n   Theni.\n<\/p>\n
2. The Assistant Director of Geology
\n   and Mines,Theni.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01\/04\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.BANUMATI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P(MD)No. 2766 Of 2008 and W.P.M.P.(MD)No.1 Of 2008 S.Shenbagavalli ..Petitioner vs. $1. The District Collector, Theni District, Theni. 2. The Assistant Director of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-217002","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nS.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2832,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\",\"name\":\"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008"},"wordCount":2832,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008","name":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-06T01:48:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-shenbagavalli-vs-the-district-collector-on-1-april-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S.Shenbagavalli vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217002","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=217002"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217002\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217002"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217002"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217002"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}