Dismissed

A.Shanmuga Barathi, v. The Executive Officer

Madras HC14 Dec 2015WP/39202/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 challenging the non-consideration of a representation by the Executive Officer, Thirumuruganpoondi Town Panchayat, was dismissed. The Court held the matter was a private dispute regarding tree planting permission and instructed the petitioner to approach the concerned authority with proper permission, refusing to interfere via writ.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus prayed for was refused; petition dismissed with no costs.

A.Shanmuga Barathi, Vs The Executive Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 14.12.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P. No.39202 of 2015

¶6

A.Shanmuga Barathi [ PETITIONER ]

¶7

Vs 1 The Executive Officer Thirumuruganpoondi Town Panchayat Tiruppur-641 652.

¶8

2 The President Iswarya Gardens Residents Association Iswarya Gardens Anupparpalayam Tiruppur- 641 654. [RESPONDENTS] PRAYER: Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2015, within a stipulated period. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajeswaran Spl.Govt. Pleader for R1

¶9

PRAYER: Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2015, within a stipulated period.

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶12

2.Heard Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader who accepts notice for the respondents.

¶13

3.The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation submitted by him dated 14.09.2015, within a stipulated period.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

4.In the said representation, the petitioner seeks for permission to plant trees on road margin. It appears to be a dispute between the petitioner and the residents association. Therefore, the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted. If the petitioner wants to plant trees and promote greenery, he has to approach the authority concerned and with their permission and in the place designated by the authorities alone, the petitioner can plant the trees. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.

¶16

5.Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
dismissed. No costs.
rpa
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
The Executive Officer
Thirumuruganpoondi Town Panchayat
Tiruppur-641 652.
+ 1 cc to Mr.R.Goviganesan, Advocate SR 66962
msm(co)
prk6/1
W.P. No.39202 of 2015

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

A.Shanmuga Barathi, v. The Executive Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Shanmuga Barathi, v. The Executive Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Devarajan, Vs the District Collector

P.Kothandan Vs Dr.Lourdhsamy

G.Rukmani, Vs The Executive Officer

M.Gnanaprakasam Vs The District Collector

Smt. R. Jayalakshmi, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

P. Jyothi, Vs The Chief Engineer