##PAGE1##

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.10.2024 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA and W.M.P(MD)No.14906 of 2016

1.Muruganandam (Died)

2.M.Vijayalakshmi

3.Deepa ... Petitioners (P2 & P3 are impleaded vide Court order, dated 05.09.2024 in W.M.P(MD)No.18042 of 2024)

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Theni District.

2.The Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Theni.

3.The Tahsildar, Theni Taluk, Theni District.

4.The Special Tahsildar (Settlement), Theni-Allinagaram, Theni.

5.The Commissioner, Theni-Allinagaram Municipality, Theni.

6.The Town Planning Officer, Theni Municipality, Theni. .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the respondent, dated 12.09.2016 in Na.Ka.No.31/2016 and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from issuing patta to any third party in respect of the portion situated between the petitioner's land in Survey No.189 (Sub Division number T.S.No.1 / 15) situated at Allinagaram Village and the bye pass road.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Anandkumar For R1-R4 & R6 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader For R5 : Mr.G.Kaleeswaran

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the 1^st respondent, dated 12.09.2016 in Na.Ka.No.31/2016 and consequently forbearing the respondents from issuing patta to any third party in respect of the portion situated between the petitioner's land in Survey No.189 (Sub Division number T.S.No.1 /

15) situated at Allinagaram Village and the bye pass road.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that 1^st petitioner is the owner of the above referred property measuring an extent of 10 cents. Out of this, 5 cents was purchased in his name and the other 5 cents was purchased in the name of his wife D.Vijayalakshmi (2^nd petitioner herein) under a registered sale deed, dated 10.07.2002. His property is situated in Theni Bye Pass road and when he had submitted the building plan, Town Planning Officer, namely the 6^th respondent herein had kept the application pending on the ground that there is a patta land of another person in front of the petitioner's property and therefore, there was no access to his property. The petitioner would submit that thereafter, he made an enquiry and came to understand that there were 3 development plans for Theni Allinagaram Municipality. Out of 3 plans, 2^nd and 3^rd plans were set aside by orders of this Court in W.P(MD)No.15519 of 2012 as it was contravention of the prescribed rules. This Court while setting aside the map by its order, dated 30.04.2013, restored the original position. As against the above order, a writ appeal was filed.

3. The petitioner would submit that between his land and Bye Pass road, no other person owned any property. If the land between the bye pass road and the petitioner's land were to be considered as another's land, it would not only result in reduction of the extent of the petitioner's valuable property, but also the reduction of the width of the Bye Pass road. The petitioner would further submit that the vested interest persons were trying to issue patta in favour of the 3^rd parties by showing Bye Pass road as land in the detailed development map. Therefore, the petitioner would submit that in the meanwhile, since he came to learn that the respondents were attempting to issue patta to third parties, he had filed W.P(MD)No.12217 of 2016 on the file of this Court and by an order, dated 13.07.2016, direction was issued to the 4^th respondent therein to consider and pass orders on the representation. This representation has now been turned down by the 3^rd respondent, who has directed the petitioner to approach the 4^th respondent to ascertain the encroachment and to ascertain the application for building approval. The grievance of the pe