W.P.No.1146 of 2001:- The Writ Petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the proceedings of the first respondent in G.O.Ms. (Valayam) No. 267, dated 112. 1998 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to remove the EE 40 feet Thitta Salai from the planning of the first respondent and to forbear them from interfering with the enjoyment of the property by the petitioners in any manner or in the alternative pay the compensation, as on 112. 1998, for the Plot Nos.1,6,17 and 18 in resurvey Nos.107 and 108/2 in Thottipalayam Village within Tirupur Town Panchayat limits.

W.P.No.5811 of 2004: The writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the third respondent, made in K.V.No.F2/11469/03, dated 18.02.2004, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to approve the plan submitted by the petitioners to the third respondent.

2. Since both the above mentioned writ petitions have arisen under the same facts and circumstances, a common order is passed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as for the respondents.

4. Originally, the writ petitioners had filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1146 of 2001, for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to pay the compensation for Plot Nos.1,6,17 and 18 in re-survey Nos.107 and 108/2 in Thottipalayam village, within the Tirupur Town panchayat limits, as per the prevailing market value for the extent of 12,200 Sq.Mts. Subsequently, by an order of this Court, dated 112. 2001, made in W.P.M.P.No.36150 of 2001, the prayer was amended praying that this Court issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent in G.O.Ms. (Valayam) No. 267, dated 112. 1998, and quash the same and to direct the respondents to remove the EE 40 feet Thittasalai, from the planning of the first respondent and to forbear them from interfering with the enjoyment of the property by the petitioners or in the alternative to pay compensation, as on 112. 1998, for Plot Nos. 1,6,17 and 18 in resurvey Nos.107 and 108/2 in Thottipalayam village within Tirupur Town panchayat limits.

.5. It has been submitted by the first petitioner that she is the owner of Plot No.6, while the second petitioner is the owner of Plot No.1 and the third petitioner is the owner of Plot Nos.17 and 18, which comprises of 3200 Sq.ft for Plot Nos. 1,6 and 17 and for the 18th plot, the extent is 2600 Sq.ft. The said plots were approved by the Municipal Office, Tirupur, on 20th April, 1939, as evident from the order passed by the then Commissioner of Tirupur municipality. The said property was purchased by Dr.S.M.Augustus in the year 1961 and it was in his possession thereafter. After partition, it fell to the share of the petitioners and they have been in enjoyment of the property, since then. While so, the third respondent municipality had demolished the compound wall covering the plots of the third petitioner which had resulted in the filing of a suit O.S.No.80 of 1977 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tirupur, in which the third respondent was made as the defendant. The District Munsif Court, Tirupur, had granted mandatory injunction after finding that the demolition of the suit wall by the defendant municipality was unauthorised and illegal. The decision was based on the available evidence and it was on the merits of the case. It has been further stated that after the demolition of the wall, the third respondent municipality had formed a mud road over the plots 1,6,17 and 18, preventing the use of the plots by the petitioners. According to the petitioner, the path which was laid by the municipality is really unnecessary , as the area is covered on the northern side by a road going to Murugappalayam, on the east by Avinasi road and in between the plots 6 and 17, there is a lay out road