Action sought against Vaikundarajan

Mining baron, however, denies removal of minerals, machinery from sealed premises

April 28, 2021 08:17 pm | Updated 08:17 pm IST - TIRUNELVELI

Seeking action against mining baron S. Vaikundarajan of V.V. Minerals for allegedly removing machinery and beach minerals from sealed premises, a complaint has been submitted to the Tirunelveli Collector.

In his complaint submitted on Tuesday, K. Sermakani of Thalaiyoothu said the premises belonging to V.V. Minerals at Vallanvilai, which had 2,384 tonnes of garnet and 1,374 tonnes of ilmenite and machinery, were sealed by the then Collector M. Karunakaran in 2015 for “illegal mining”.

However, some people had taken out the minerals and the machinery from the defunct industry premises after breaking the seals affixed by the Revenue Department, the complainant said.

When contacted, Tirunelveli Collector V. Vishnu told The Hindu that he had received a petition from Mr. Sermakani, who had also sent a copy of the complaint to Sub-Collector, Cheranmahadevi, Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Range, Principal Secretary, Department of Industries, Commissioner for Geology and Mining and Chief Electoral Officer of Tamil Nadu.

Refuting the allegations, Mr. Vaikundarajan said the charges made in the complaint “were malicious and false”.

“The charges made against me are the result of intra-family property dispute, which is in court. Neither the machinery nor the beach minerals in the sealed building were taken out. Anyone can verify it at any time after obtaining permission from the Collector as the building was sealed on the instructions of the then Collector in 2015,” Mr. Vaikundarajan said.

He also said he had filed a complaint with Uvari police against his nephew J. Senthilrajan (son of his younger brother S. Jegadeesan) for allegedly trespassing into his property, taking photographs, videographing the property and assaulting him when he stopped him and his accomplices during an inspection of the sealed premises by a court-appointed receiver in connection with a case few days ago.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.