'Scientist' Rapped by Madras HC for Misusing PIL on 'Illegal' Mining

Madras High Court has bombarded a 72- year-old man, claiming to be an ocean scientist, for levelling reckless allegations.

Published: 16th December 2015 04:04 AM  |   Last Updated: 16th December 2015 04:19 AM   |  A+A-

CHENNAI: Madras High Court has bombarded a 72- year-old man, claiming to be an ocean scientist, for levelling reckless allegations against the State government in the matter of grant of licence to VV Minerals of mining baron S Vaikuntarajan.

“We must express our great anguish and pain at the manner in which the PIL forum is sought to be utilised by the petitioner...’’ observed Chief Justice SK Kaul and Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, on Tuesday.What made the judges to slam petitioner, G Victor Rajamaniackam, was his inability to produce material evidence in support of his serious allegations, despite repeated queries.

The PIL alleged that there was a massive corruption and illegality in the mining of beach sand minerals such as monazite, ilmenite, rutile, zircon, garnet, leucoxene and other associate minerals in the coastal districts of TN. The State machinery is subservient to the mafia involved in the mining. Vaikuntarajan and his associates have gained illegal monopoly and are engaged in mining the valuable minerals.

The bench noted that the petitioner hails from Madurai and after obtaining post-graduation in M.Sc geology, joined the Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, for pursuing doctorate in mining geology. After obtaining Ph.D, he claims to have undergone specialized training in deep sea exploration in the technical university, Aatheri in Germany. He claims to be a scientist in the Indian National Institute of Oceonography, Goa, and was designated as chief investigator to prepare a plan for exploration of coastal minerals.

Despite all this, he had filed the PIL and failed to substantiate his claim by producing material evidence, the bench pointed out. When the bench indicated that it was inclined to pass an order, counsel for petitioner, sensing that it would be an adverse one, sought time for obtaining instructions from his client. And the bench adjourned the matter by two days, despite the objections raised by the senior counsel for Vaikuntarajan.

Stay up to date on all the latest Chennai news with The New Indian Express App. Download now


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp