Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 501
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
M. Senthilkumar - Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, Chennai & Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 6673 of 2020
Decided On : 20-03-2024
For the Petitioner: K. Karthikeyan for E. Sampath Kumar.
For the Respondents:S. Karthikeyan, K. Karthikeyan, Govt. Advocate (HR & CE).
IMPORTANT POINT
The court's decision was based on the assurance given by the respondents to proceed with the removal of encroachment in accordance with the law.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Encroachment on Temple Property - The court disposed of the writ petition seeking the removal of encroachment on temple property, as the respondents, including the Slum Clearance Board, assured that they would proceed to remove the encroachment in accordance with the law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the removal of encroachment made on Plot No.41 in Balavinayagar Temple, Arumbakkam, Chennai.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the writ petition based on the assurance given by the respondents that they would proceed to remove the encroachment in accordance with the law.
Issues: Encroachment on temple property and ownership dispute between the Slum Clearance Board and the family members of Jayaraman.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the assurance given by the respondents that they would proceed to remove the encroachment in accordance with the law, and the pendency of a suit between the Slum Clearance Board and the family members of Jayaraman.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, J.
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the first and third respondents to take immediate steps to remove the encroachment made in Plot No.41, Survey No.108, T.S.No.10/3, Block No.12 in Balavinayagar Temple, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 106.)
We have heard Mr. K. Karthikeyan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. E. Sampath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S. Karthikeyan, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3; and, Mr. K. Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate (HR & CE) for respondent No.2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that encroachment is made on Plot No.41, Survey No.108, T.S.No.10/3, Block No.12 in Balavinayagar Temple, Arumbakkam, Chennai.
3. Learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3 submits that the land in question is owned by the Slum Clearance Board. Allotment of the said Plot No.41 is not made to anyone. The family members of one Jayaraman have filed O.S.No.4019 of 2017 and the same is pending before the XVI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. The Slum Clearance Board is party in the said suit.
4. In case there are no interim orders in the said suit, then the Slum Clearance Board can proceed ahead in accordance with law for claiming its property.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3 submits that, if there are no prohibitory orders in the suit, then respondents 1 and 3 would proceed ahead for removal of encroachment on the subject writ property in accordance with law.
6. In the light of the said statement made by learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3, no further orders are necessary in the present writ petition. The writ petition, as such, is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
