Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G. Arul Murugan, J
MOHAN RAMASAMY – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks mandamus for water body encroachment removal. (Para 1) |
| 2. eviction proceedings initiated with section 7 notice issued. (Para 2) |
| 3. state counsel reports appropriate action will be taken. (Para 3) |
| 4. petition disposed with direction to complete process within twelve weeks. (Para 4) |
This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments water body in the survey nos 342, 344, 346, 348, 366/1 and 366/6 of the Ezhusempon Village, Kanjannur
2. Second respondent has filed counter affidavit. On perusal of the counter, it is seen that the eviction proceedings have already been initiated and show cause notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 has been issued to encroachers granting 15 days’ time to respond.
3. Learned State counsel submits that appropriate action would be taken for removal of encroachments in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to second respondent to complete the process as early as possible, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
