Remanded

Uma Mohanraj v. Secretary to Government

Madras HC14 Jun 2017WP/10677/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking Mandamus to consider a representation alleging a layout approved under a vendor's brother is null and void, the High Court directed the petitioner to submit copies of the representation to the Director within two weeks so the authority may decide within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit copy of representation to Director within two weeks; Director directed to pass orders within eight weeks.

Uma Mohanraj Vs Secretary to Government — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 14.06.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P.No.10677 of 2017

¶6

Uma Mohanraj ...Petitioner

¶7

/versus/

¶8

Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director, Town and Country Planning,
807, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 002.
3. The Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning,
(Coimbatore Region),
Dr.Nanjappa Road, Corporation Shopping Complex,
Coimbatore – 641 018.

¶9

The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Coimbatore – 641 018. 5. The Corporation Commissioner, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation, Coimbatore – 641 001. ...Respondents

¶10

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 09.02.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.Lita Srinivasan For R1 to R4 : M/s.M.E.Raniselvam

¶12

Additional Government Pleader

¶13

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 09.02.2017.

¶14

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

¶15

The petitioner is stated to have purchased a specified extent of property from her vendor, by name, Rangammal in the year 1992. The property purchased by the petitioner appears to be earmarked for public purpose in the layout. There was a partition dispute between the vendor of the petitioner and other family members in O.S.No.1182 of 1980 based upon the partition deed. The petitioner made a representation on 09.02.2017 interalia alleging that the layout approved at the instance of her vendor's brother is null and void. Seeking to consider the said representation, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶16

This Court is not willing to go in to the merits of the case. As the petitioner's representation dated 09.02.2017, is pending consideration with the 2^nd respondent, the petitioner is directed to give another copy of the said representation along with the copy of this order to the 2^nd respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation, the 2^nd respondent is directed to look into the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶17

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed

¶18

of. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶19

//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

rna To 1. Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Director, Town and Country Planning, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3. The Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, (Coimbatore Region), Dr.Nanjappa Road, Corporation Shopping Complex, Coimbatore – 641 018.

¶21

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

¶22

The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Coimbatore – 641 018.

¶23

The Corporation Commissioner, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation, Coimbatore – 641 001.

¶24

+1cc to Mr.Srinivasan, Advocate, S.R.No.40868

¶25

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.42190

¶26

W.P.No.10677 of 2017
RSY(CO)
RS(22/06/2017)

¶27

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

Uma Mohanraj v. Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Mohanraj v. Secretary to Government

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

V.Krishnasamy Vs The Assistant Electrical

P.Mani, Vs J.Muthulakshmi

M/s.K.Parthasarathy Spinning Vs The Chairman and

M.Sornam Vs The Collector

P.Annadurai Vs District Collector

M.Subramaniam, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu