In this PIL regarding alleged unauthorized temple property construction, the petitioner challenged a village service centre build. The court held land was government-owned with due authorization and refused to quash the construction or inspect road access.
The writ petition was dismissed; no costs were awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.06.2016
CORAM :
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
W.P. No.18476 of 2016
and W.M.P.No.16183 of 2016
R.Venkatesan .. Petitioner
-vs-
1.The State, rep. By
The District Collector,
Thiruvannamalai,
Thiruvannamalai District.
2.The State, rep. By
The Block Development Officer,
Thiruvannamalai,
Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The President,
Semmiyamangalam Village Panchayat,
Polur (Tk) Thiruvannamalai (Dt.)
606 090.
4.T.S.Sivaprakasam .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus to forbear the
respondents from constructing the village service centre at
survey No.233 in the backside of the temple at Semmiyamangalam
Village, Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.p.Venkatakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan
Addl. Govt. Pleader for RR 1 to 3
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by M.M.Sundresh, J.)
This Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner inter alia alleging that construction is going on at the instance of the respondents over the property belonging to the temple by affecting its backside.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without any entry point or provision for ingress or egress, the construction is being carried out.
3.Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the construction is already over in Survey No.233, which belongs to the Government and therefore, the writ petition has to be dismissed.
4.Inasmuch as the land belongs to the Government and the construction has been put up after due authorisation, we do not propose to interfere in this matter. The question of having adequate road or pathway also cannot be gone into in this petition. 5.Writ petition, accordingly, stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.16183 of 2016 also stands dismissed. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sra To 1.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District. 2.The Block Development Officer, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District. 3.The President, Semmiyamangalam Village Panchayat, Polur (Tk) Thiruvannamalai (Dt.) 606 090. 1 cc to Mr.V.Jayaprakash, Advocate, sr.31376 W.P.No.18476 of 2016 bvr co kra 21.06.2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus to forbid construction at Survey No. 233 despite lack of access provisions.
R. Venkatesan
The State, represented by The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai
The State, represented by The Block Development Officer, Thiruvannamalai
The President, Semmiyamangalam Village Panchayat
T.S. Sivaprakasam
M.M. Sundresh
R. Mahadevan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
