Disposed

S.Padmanabhan, v. The District Collector

Madras HC12 Sept 2017WP/22896/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed writ petition under Article 226 seeking direction to the District Collector to consider a representation dated 10.08.2017 for issuance of Patta within a time frame. The 2nd respondent was directed to pass orders within eight weeks without expression of opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.08.2017 and pass orders within eight weeks.

S.Padmanabhan, Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 12.09.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶6

WP.No.22896 of 2017
S.Padmanabhan .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Maduravoyal,
Thiruvallur District. .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of

¶8

India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the

¶9

1^st respondent to consider and pass appropriate order on the

¶10

representation on 10.08.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Anbarasan For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajeswaran,Spl.GP

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 10.08.2017 within a time frame.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner has given a representation, dated 10.08.2017 for the issuance of Patta, the 2^nd respondent has not passed any order so far.

¶17

Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the 2^nd respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks.

¶18

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 10.08.2017 and pass orders in accordance with law,

¶19

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

¶21

within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶22

order.

¶23

With this observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶24

12.09.2017
sk
To
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Maduravoyal,
Thiruvallur District.

¶25

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.DURAISWAMY,J.

WP.No.22896 of 2017
12.09.2017

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

S.Padmanabhan, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Padmanabhan, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Hari, Vs The District Collector

L.Ukesh, Vs The District Collecor

Mr.Suresh Bafna Vs the Chairman

G.Manickavelu, Vs G.Subramani

N.Murali Vs The Regional Transport

M/s. S.R. Paper Board Vs The Inspector General of