Dismissed

K.Logammal, v. The District Collector

Madras HC11 Apr 2017WP/8647/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged revenue order to remove encroachment via Art. 226 writ. Court dismissed petition as infructuous due to a pending Government appeal against the impugned order, leaving questions open for the appeal decision.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous as appeal to Government against impugned order was pending; filed all questions open for decision in appeal.

K.Logammal, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 11.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The HON'BLE MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶7

W.P.No.8647 of 2017
and
W.M.P.No.9451 of 2017
K.Logammal .. Petitioner
vs.
1. The District Collector,
Sathuvachari,
Vellore District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Ranipet, Vellore District.
3. The District Superintendent of Police,
Sathuvachari,
Vellore District – 9.
4. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Law & Order,
Thakkolam,
Vellore District. .. Respondents

¶8

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of forbearing the second respondent from interfering with the possession of the petitioner's land comprised in Survey No.6, Murungai Village, measuring an extent of 0.64.0 Hectares and consequently direct the second respondent to adhere to the procedure to remove the encroachment after the order of the first respondent dated 26.08.2016 made in Na.Ka.No.B4/1590/2013 received by the petitioner on 31.08.2016.

¶9

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

¶10

For Petitioner : Mrs.G.Thilagavathy Senior Counsel for M/s.R.Gopinath

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Spl. Government Pleader for all respondents

¶12

ORDER

¶13

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶14

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought orders restraining the second respondent from interfering with the possession of the petitioner's land comprised in Survey No.6, Murungai Village, measuring an extent of 0.64.0 Hectares and to direct the second respondent to adhere to the procedure to remove the encroachment as per the order of the first respondent dated 26^th August, 2016 in Na.Ka.No.B4/1590/2013, received by the petitioner on 31^st August, 2016.

¶15

The petitioner was in possession of about 0.64.0 Hectares of agricultural lands situated in Survey No.6 of Murungai Village, Arakkonam Taluk.

¶16

Notice under Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, hereinafter referred to as “the said Act” was issued by the Tahsildar, Arakkonam on 10^th June, 2013. On 03^rd January, 2014, notice under Section 6 of the said Act was issued. Against the order passed under Section 6 of the said Act, an appeal has been filed before the Government and the same is pending.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid appeal, the writ petition has become infructuous. No order need to be passed in the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. All questions are left open to be decided in the appeal. The appeal shall be decided by the Government expeditiously, preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of the communication of this order, after giving the petitioner further opportunity of hearing, if the appeal has not already been disposed of. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.9451 of 2017 is closed.

¶18

Assistant Registrar

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

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

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

To:

¶23

The District Collector,
Sathuvachari,
Vellore District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Ranipet, Vellore District.
3. The District Superintendent of Police,
Sathuvachari,
Vellore District – 9.
4. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Law & Order,
Thakkolam,
Vellore District.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.22081
kgk(CO)
md(12/04/2017)
W.P.No.8647 of 2017

¶24

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

K.Logammal, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Logammal, v. The District Collector

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

P.Seethalakshmi Vs The Regional Deputy

Kannan Vs The Regional Deputy

Ar Muthuraman Vs The Member Secretary

T.Dhanasekaran Vs The Chief Election

R.Arumugam Vs The Commissioner

Smt.M.Lavanya, Vs The Chairman