|
Author: Sandhya Ravishankar
Publication: Sandhyaravishankar.Substack.com
Date: July 27, 2026
URL: https://sandhyaravishankar.substack.com/p/how-to-avoid-trial-for-14-years-prp
Form multiple committees that give differing reports and delay justice, is the mantra for conspiring government officials and the miners
It has been 14 long years.
In this time, the resource-strapped State of Tamil Nadu has, curiously, not recovered penalties and losses worth ₹13,178.49 crore to the exchequer from illegally mined and exported granite from Madurai district.
Nor has the case even gone to trial yet!
Let us recap the case first.
• March 2011: The Election Commission of India posted IAS officer U. Sagayam as the District Collector of Madurai.
• May 19, 2012: Sagayam submitted a 13-page interim report on illegal granite mining in Madurai district, alleging losses to the exchequer of ₹16,338 crore from 39 lakh cubic metres of illegally mined granite.
• May 29, 2012: Sagayam was transferred, IAS officer Anshul Mishra took charge as District Collector, Madurai.
• August 2012: Anshul Mishra took up the case and formed 18 teams to probe allegations of illegal granite mining across the district.
• PRP Granites owner P. Palanisamy and others were arrested. Olympus Granites owner and then Union Minister of Fertilizers M.K. Alagiri’s son Dayanidhi Alagiri went into hiding fearing arrest. Homes of former Madurai Collectors N. Mathivanan and C. Kamaraj were raided by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The findings:
The miners had been found to have possessed licences to mine granite in specific lands. They were alleged to have conspired with government officials and mined illegally in poromboke lands, water bodies, water channels, government waste lands, private lands and lands belonging to Tamil Nadu Minerals (TAMIN), a government body. They were alleged to have illegally blocked water channels meant for irrigation.
Sections filed on the miners include:
• Sections 447, 434, 379, 420, 430, 465, 467, 468, 471, 304 (ii) of IPC read with Sections 109, 114, 511 of IPC
• Section 3 (i) (ii) & 4 of the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act 1992
• Section 3 (a) & 4 (a) & 6 of Explosive Substance Act 1908 read with Section 120 (b)
The proceeds of crime were alleged to have been laundered through purchase of land and other immovable properties.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• THE FIRST COMMITTEE - August 04, 2012: A committee led by NC Mohandas, Deputy Director, Department of Geology and Mining was formed to probe illegal granite mining.
• November 23, 2012: Evaluation report was submitted by the Mohandas Committee. Collector Anshul Mishra ordered the closure of 95 of 175 granite quarries, froze their bank accounts, filed 98 FIRs against PRP Exports, PRP Granites, Olympus Granites and Sindhu Granites, among others, as well as against government officials who colluded with the miners. The Mohandas Committee found that granite blocks worth ₹13,178.49 crore had been mined and exported illegally.
However, there was a problem found in the computation of both, the illegally mined granite as well as the computation of losses incurred by the State government. Every piece of rock hewn does not contain 100% granite. The percentage of granite recovered from the mined rock varies from 10% to 90%, depending on the location of the land. For instance, TAMIN-owned quarries are likely to have recovery rate of upto 90%, as they are richer in granite than other patta lands.
The Mohandas Committee had uniformly taken 90% recovery rate for its calculation of losses due to illegal granite mining, which was incorrect. Another issue was that the Mohandas Committee had measured only freshly cut rock to compute illegal mining. Quarries which had been illegally mined over many years would have, over time, grown vegetation, and the miners had also covered many quarry pits to hide their illegal acts. There was a deficiency in the Mohandas Report.
• THE SECOND COMMITTEE - February 14, 2013: Upon realising the errors and since the miners requested that a more scientific analysis be done on recovery rate, a re-evaluation of losses was ordered. The district authorities set up a Committee led by A. Palanivel, Deputy Director, Department of Geology and Mining was formed for a scientific, exact and exhaustive calculation of illegally mined granite in 83 blocks, also taking into account waste granite. This Committee found that recovery of granite from rock was between 18% to 70%. This Committee also scientifically measured the older mines to obtain the historic amount of granite mined.
• Sources say the quantum of illegal mining found in the Palanivel Report was more precise & reasonable than in the Mohandas Report.
• June 29, 2013: Anshul Mishra was transferred before the probe was completed. The case against illegal granite mining fell silent as officials conveniently used the existence of two reports to justify non-action.
• July 2014: Late activist ‘Traffic’ Ramaswamy filed a PIL in the Madras High Court demanding the illegal granite mining case be investigated to its logical end. He also demanded that the Chief Secretary be directed to appoint U. Sagayam as a Special officer to conduct and complete the probe.
• September 11, 2014: The Madras High Court appointed Sagayam as Special Officer and Legal Commissioner in the illegal granite mining probe.
• THE THIRD COMMITTEE - March 16, 2015: With the Supreme Court directing the authorities to go ahead with the probe, the then District Collector of Madurai cited the findings of two Committees — Mohandas and Palanivel — and raised the question to the State government over which report to adopt for further action. In response, the State government formed yet another committee — a High-Level Committee led by Raju, an official of the Geological Survey of India. This Committee was meant to finalise the issuance of showcause notices to the miners, after taking into consideration both the reports.
• THE NEXT PROBE- November 23, 2015: The 600-page report submitted by Sagayam to the Court pegged the loss to exchequer at ₹65,154.60 crore. Penalties, when, added to the value of illegally mined granite brought the total to ₹1.06 lakh crore.
• March 16, 2015: A Division Bench of the Madras High Court comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M.M. Sundresh ordered the trial court to conclude the proceedings and pass final orders within a period of two months. But no action was taken by the State government.
• 2018: Enforcement Directorate (ED) files cases under Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 (PMLA) against the granite miners.
• March 31, 2021: The Raju Committee submitted its report after six long years.
• Curiously, however, straying far from its brief, the Raju Committee took upon itself the job of inspecting the mining blocks and arrived at its own findings. Sources say the Raju Report estimated overall recovery of granite at less than 30%, thereby drastically reducing the quantum of illegal mining; a big boost for the illegal miners.
• THE FOURTH COMMITTEE - February 20, 2023: A high level expert team headed by Retired Madras HC Justice P. Jyothimani was set up by the Tamil Nadu government to once again evaluate the penalties and value of illegally mined granite in 83 blocks in Madurai district. This Committee was set up ostensibly to assist the District Collector, once again, in framing showcause notices, since there were multiple reports in existence.
• July 10, 2024: Justice Jyothimani report submitted to then Minister for Water Resources & Natural Resources, Duraimurugan.
• Sources say that this report further reduced the quantum of illegal mining by reducing the recovery rate of granite.
A Scathing Judgement on June 26, 2026
The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justice N. Anand Venkatesh and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan delivered a landmark and scathing judgement on June 26 questioning the State government as to why no steps had been taken to recover the penalties from the miners, 14 years since the case was first filed.
The quash petition was filed before the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court by PRP Exports, PRP Granites, PRP Granite Exports, P. Palanisamy, P. Senthil Kumar, P. Suresh Kumar, P. Selvi, S. Chandralekha and A. Maharajan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the Raju Report of 2021 which was cited by counsel for the miners, the Court stated that the report “categorically discloses that no offence is made out against the accused in respect of the allegations contained in the final report, namely illegal mining and other allied offences. It is seen from record, Hon’ble Supreme Court never issued any direction to constitute a committee to assess damage and there was proceeding pending before the court to take action under PMLA, and against certain Government officials, who acted in collusion with the accused, subsequently misinterpreted the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and proceeded to constitute another Committee to re-examine the Mohandas valuation report.
Moreover, the contention that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had granted liberty or directed constitution of such a Committee is wholly misconceived. Prima facie, reliance placed upon the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to justify the constitution of the Committee appears to be a total misinterpretation of the order and cannot confer any legal sanctity upon the report.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did the miners manufacture a rosy report with the help of colluding officials? That is a question that needs to be investigated and the guilty, punished.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Madurai bench also underscored the role played by government officials prima facie in the conspiracy to illegally mine and export granite.
“Firstly, the materials on record prima facie indicate that the alleged illegal mining activities were not isolated incidents but done calculatively with the alleged connivance of certain officials, who have also been arrayed as accused in the final report. The materials available on record prima facie indicate that, pursuant to an unholy nexus and concerted design, certain public officials, who were entrusted with the custody and protection of the mineral resources of the State, allegedly colluded with the accused and facilitated the continuation of large-scale illegal mining activities.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the issue of 14 years of delay in recovering penalties and losses to the State government due to illegal mining, the Court did not mince words.
“instead of expeditiously concluding the proceedings initiated in the year 2012 for recovery of the huge revenue loss caused by the illegal mining operations and the damage inflicted upon public properties, successive committees came to be constituted and no effective action appears to have been taken by the competent authority, namely, successive District Collectors, Madurai.”
The court added that the records — “prima facie indicate that the prolonged delay has been facilitated through an unholy nexus between certain former public officials, politicians and the accused, resulting in substantial prejudice to the interests of the State exchequer. The prolonged pendency of the recovery proceedings has also had the effect of delaying the criminal prosecution arising out of the very same illegal mining activities.
The criminal case has remained pending for more than fourteen years. Many of the prosecution witnesses aged about 62 years and they have been awaiting the conclusion of the proceedings for an unreasonably long period namely, 14 years. The interest of justice demands that the criminal trial be concluded without any further delay.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In effect, the court says government officials, politicians and the miners formed a nexus to delay the trial by 14 years.
Finally, the court directed the Chief Secretary to constitute a Special Public Prosecution Team by appointing competent Public Prosecutors. The Chief Secretary was also directed to make every endeavour to conclude the trial, “preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
The court’s conclusion is pithy as much as it is a warning.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“This Court is constrained to observe that, almost on daily basis, it is confronted with cases relating to illegal mining and illegal quarrying. Such activities are not isolated incidents but appear to have continued unabated for several years, resulting in large-scale depletion of the State’s natural resources.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ball is now in the TVK government’s court, especially since the Chief Minister has promised a non-corrupt government. What should it do now?
1. Use the findings of the Palanivel Committee report.
2. Recover the losses from illegal granite mining with penalties from the miners.
3. Conclude the trial in this case within three months as directed by the court.
• Justice has been awaited for 14 long years. |
