At a single line, the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner to restrain eviction from property. The court noted the property dispute between a municipality and a wakf board and observed that due process of law must be followed, closing the connected miscellaneous petition without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.09.2017 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.19954 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015
K.Mahalakshmi ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The District Collector, Theni District.
2.The Tahsildar, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.
3.The Commissioner, Periyakulam Municipality, Periyakulam.
4.The President, Nawab Jamia Masjid, Vadakarai Pallivasal, Periyakulam, Theni. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the third respondent from in any manner evict the petitioner from the property, comprised in S.No.1797, bearing Door No.WD-09, Near Old Bus Stand, Ammayanayakkanur Road, Periyakulam except under due process of law.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Suriya Narayanan For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Md.Mohideen, Addl. Govt. Pleader for RR1 & 2
Mr.Ajmal Khan, Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates for R4 Mr.M.Karuppasamy Pandian R3
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)
The writ petitioner apprehends that he would be illegally dispossessed from the property comprised in S.No.1797, bearing https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Door No.WD-09, Near Old Bus Stand, Ammayanayakkanur Road, Periyakulam.
2
2.According to the writ petitioner, the property belongs to the third respondent Municipality. But, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent would contend that the property belongs to the fourth respondent wakf board. If it is a wakf property, the procedure set out in the Wakf Act would be adopted. If it belongs to the third respondent, the statutory procedure would be followed. In any event, due process of law would be followed.
3.This writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(Writs)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The District Collector,Theni District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.
3.The Commissioner,
Periyakulam Municipality, Periyakulam.
+1cc to M/S.R.SURIYA NARAYANAN, Advocate SR.No.79103
+1cc to M/S.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate SR.No.78854
+1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 79019
Skm / Arul
MAS/SKN-RSK/SAR2:13.10.2017:2P-7C
W.P(MD)No.19954 of 2015
and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015
13 September 2017
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Mahalakshmi
The District Collector, Theni District
The Tahsildar, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District
The Commissioner, Periyakulam Municipality, Periyakulam
The President, Nawab Jamia Masjid, Vadakarai Pallivasal, Periyakulam, Theni
K.K.SASIDHARAN
G.R.SWAMINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
