SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 35092

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated 01.09.2021 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM W.P. No.15939 of 2021 V.Ramanujam .. Petitioner Versus

1. The District Collector, Kanchipuram District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, The Collectorate Office Building, Kanchipuram District - 600 501.

3. The Block Development Officer, Kundrathur Panchayat, Padappai 602 301.

4. Deva Xavier

5. The Tahsildar, Kundrathur .. Respondents [R5, suo motu impleaded by this Court vide order dated 03.08.2021 in WP.No.15939 of 2021]

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to dispose of the representation dated 26.02.2021 submitted to restore the road to the original size by removing the encroachment.

For petitioner : Mr.S.Mohan For respondents for RR1, 2 and 5 : Mr.C.Jayaprakash, Govt. Counsel for R3 : No Appearance for R4 : Mr.D.Vijayan

ORDER

(The Order of the Court was made by K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J)

The Writ Petition is heard through video conferencing.

2. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 26.02.2021.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that by virtue of settlement deed dated 13.09.2010, he become the absolute owner of the property bearing plot No.19 having an extent of 850 sq.ft. in Survey Nos.128/7 and 131 at Srinivasapuram Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk.

4. The grievance expressed by the petitioner is that the fourth respondent, who is the owner of the plot No.13 has encroached upon the public road and causing hindrance to the public. Despite the representation to the respondents, no action has been taken to remove the enroachment.

5. Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents 1, 2 and 5 would state that the competent authority is the concerned Tahsildar and he has been impleaded as fifth respondent and if a representation is given to the fifth respondent, he is ready to take action in accordance with law.

6. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent Mr.D.Vijayan, that the private respondent has constructed the building within his area and there is no encroachment.

7. In the light of the above submissions of the learned counsels appearing on either side, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the petitioner to give fresh representation to the fifth respondent/the Tahsildar, Kundrathur, by enclosing a copy of this order, within a period of four weeks. On such receipt, the fifth respondent shall consider the same and take action in accordance with law, after providing opportunity to the necessary parties, within a period of twelve weeks, therefrom.

8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]

01.09.2021 Speaking order: Yes/No Index : Yes/No pvs To

1. The District Collector, Kanchipuram District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, The Collectorate Office Building, Kanchipuram District - 600 501.

3. The Block Development Officer, Kundrathur Panchayat, Padappai 602 301.

4. The Tahsildar, Kundrathur K .KALYANASUNDARAM, J.

and V .SIVAGNANAM, J.

pvs W.P. No.15939 of 2021

01.09.2021

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top