Disposed

Mohammed Riyas Bazul Ashab v. the District Collector

Madras HC5 Sept 2017WP(MD)/15378/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a writ petition challenging encroachment on a public road. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court held the Corporation Commissioner to be the competent authority, directed notice to encroachers, and mandated removal within three months via statutory procedures. No costs were ordered.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to issue notice to encroachers and remove encroachments from public road within three months following statutory procedures.

Mohammed Riyas Bazul Ashab Vs the District… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 05.09.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.15378 of 2017

¶7

Mohammad Riyas Bazul Ashab : Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶10

2.The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi.

¶11

3.The Tahsildar, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶12

4.Ravi : Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents two and three to remove the encroachment made in the public road in S.No.1336/2, Ward No.2, Block No.14, Thoothukudi Corporation, within the time that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff For R.1 to R.3 : Mr.T.S.Md.Mohideen Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.]

¶19

This writ petition has been filed for directing the respondents two and three to remove the encroachment said to have https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ been made in the public road in Survey No.1336/2, Ward No.2, Block No.14, Thoothukudi Corporation limits.

¶20

¶21

2.The second respondent is the competent authority to take action in the matter. The writ petitioner has already given representation in this regard.

¶22

3.We, therefore, direct the second respondent to take action for removing such encroachments. Notice shall be given to the encroachers. Statutory procedures shall be followed. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

4.The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(Writs) /True Copy/

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶29

2.The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi.

¶30

3.The Tahsildar, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶31

+One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.NO.76977

¶32

+One cc to M/s.Ajmal Associates, Advocate, SR.No.76491

¶33

tsg RL/6C/2P/KP/SAR1/7/11/2017

¶34

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.15378 of 2017

¶35

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

¶36

dated: 05.09.2017

Mohammed Riyas Bazul Ashab v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Riyas Bazul Ashab 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

The Chairman and Managing Vs N. Indirani

I.Devaram Justin, Vs the District Collector

Raj Vs the District Collector

P. Duraisamy, Vs the District Collector

Venkatachalam Vs the Commissioner

Kaluvan, S/O.Muthuveeran, Vs the District Collector