Partly allowed

M.Thirupathi v. the Principal Chief

Madras HC22 Mar 2017WMP(MD)/3799/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought appointment of an Advocate Commissioner and quashing of an auction work order regarding Nattu Karuvelam trees. The Madurai Bench allowed the petition appointing a commissioner to inspect the site and verify tree existence by a specified date.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to appoint Laxmi Kanth as Commissioner at Rs.5,000 to inspect trees and submit report by 17.04.2017.

M.Thirupathi Vs the Principal Chief — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Second day of March Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT

¶3

The Honble Mr.Justice **A.SELVAM** AND The Honble Mr.Justice N.AUTHINATHAN WMP(MD) No.3799 of 2017 IN WP(MD) No.3657 of 2017

¶4

M.THIRUPATHI ... Petitioner

¶5

1.THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, PANAGAL MALIGAI, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 600 015

¶6

2.THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, RAMANATHAPURAM.

¶7

3.THE SUPERINTENDT ENGINEER,

¶8

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, RAMANATHAPURAM

¶9

4.SINGADURAI, S/O.PANDI, N.MANAKUDI,

¶10

ATTANKUDI POST,PARAMAKUDI TALUK, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶11

Prayer in WMP(MD). 3799/ 2017 :

¶12

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,praying this Court to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the Nattu Karuvelam trees standing in the 2005 - Vennathur Tank, situated at Ramanathapuram Taluk and District and to file a Inspection Report.

¶13

Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.3657/17.

¶14

This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this court to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the impugned work order passed under Na.Ka.471/2017/ka dated 16.02.2017,on the file of the 2^nd respondent herein and to quash the same as illegal and undervalued and direct the 2^nd respondent to auction the 'Nattu-Karuvelam Trees' laying in 2005.Vennathur Tank,Ramanathapuram District coming under the ambit of the 2^nd respondent herein by following due process of law.

¶15

ORDER : This petition coming on for hearing on this day, upon perusing the petition and affidavit and material papers of this petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.R.LAXMAN, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govindan, Special Government Pleader on behlaf of the respondents 1 to 3 and the fourth respondent not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ appeared either in person or by and advocate,this court made the following order:-

¶16

¶17

This petition has been filed praying to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the reason mentioned therein.

¶18

2.It is averred in the petition that in Vennathur Tank, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District, so many Nattukaruvelam trees are available and the second respondent has auctioned the same for lower price. Under the said circumstances, for noting down the existence of Nattukaruvelam trees, appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is very much essential and therefore the present petition has been filed for getting the relief sought therein.

¶19

3.Considering the averments made in the petition and also the purpose for which appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is sought, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

¶20

4.In fine, this petition is allowed. Advocate Mr.S.Lakshmi Kanth, [Enrollment No.1089/2009], No.97, Law Chambers, High Court Buildings, Madurai, Cell No.93676 83848 is appointed as Commissioner and his fee is fixed at Rs.5,000/- [Rupees five thousand only] and the same should be paid directly by the petitioner. The Advocate Commissioner is directed to visit the place mentioned in the petition and find out the existence of Nattukaruvelam trees.

¶21

5.Commissioner Report and Plan by 17.04.2017.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

/True Copy/

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

1.THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OFFICER, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, PANAGAL MALIGAI, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 600 015

¶28

¶29

2.THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, RAMANATHAPURAM. 3.THE SUPERINTENDT ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, RAMANATHAPURAM.

¶30

Copy to:

¶31

Mr.S.Lakshmi Kanth, Advocate, (Enrl No.1089/2009) No.97 Law Chambers, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai-625 023.

¶32

+1 cc to Mr.K.R.LAXMAN, Advocate SR.No. 16974

¶33

Dated :22/03/2017

¶34

ORDER

¶35

WMP(MD) No.3799 of 2017 IN

¶36

WP(MD) No.3657 of 2017

¶37

Direction given as stated within.

¶38

JM/SKN/SAR 2/03.04.2017/2P/6C

¶39

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

M.Thirupathi v. the Principal Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Thirupathi v. the Principal Chief

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

D.S.Selvam, Vs the District Collector

K.Rajan Vs the District Collector

T.Rajarathinam Vs the Commissioner

V.Gopalsamy, Vs the Secretary

V.Ramadass, Vs the State Commissioner of

Solaimalai @ Sivasolaimalai Vs the District Collector