Dismissed

S. Kaliammal v. the District Collector

Madras HC6 Sept 2017WP(MD)/20561/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act. The court held the petition was premature as no adverse order was passed and directed the petitioner to challenge the eventual order instead.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with observation that the petitioner may challenge any adverse order passed subsequently; no costs.

S. Kaliammal Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.09.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.20561 of 2015

¶5

and

¶6

W.M.P(MD)No.6245 of 2016

S.Kaliammal

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Collector, Sivagangai,

¶12

Sivagangai District.

¶13

3.The Tahsildar,

¶14

Thirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶15

4.The Revenue Inspector,

Nachiapuram,

Sivagangai District.

... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus directing the respondents to calling for the records and proceedings relating to the Impugned notice dated 05.11.2015 issued by the 4^th respondent with regard to the property comprised in Survey No.25/3 in Keelaiyur Village, Thirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District and quashing the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents not to take any action under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act 1905 in the above said patta land in the name of husband of the petitioner.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan

¶21

Special Government Pleader

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN,J. ]

¶24

Notice issued by the 4^th respondent is under challenge in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this writ petition primarily on the ground that being a patta land, the authorities are not entitled to survey or removal of

¶25

¶26

encroachment.

¶27

2.The challenge is only to a notice. The fourth respondent has not passed any adverse order against the petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the order, in case, any such order is passed.

¶28

3.The writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶29

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-I) /True copy/

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶33

2.The District Revenue Officer,

¶34

Office of the District Collector, Sivagangai,

¶35

Sivagangai District.

¶36

3.The Tahsildar, Thirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶37

4.The Revenue Inspector, Nachiapuram, Sivagangai District.

¶38

+1cc to Mr.S.J.CHAKKARAVARTHY,Advocate,SR.76933 +1cc to M/S.Special Government Pleader,SR. 77683 W.P.(MD)No.20561 of 2015 06.09.2017 sss/am KK/SV MMS/SAR 2/27.09.2017/ 2P- 7C/

¶39

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

S. Kaliammal v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Kaliammal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Duraisamy, Vs the District Collector

Venkatachalam Vs the Commissioner

Mohammed Riyas Bazul Ashab Vs the District Collector

Anbuselvi Vs the Divisional Manager

C. Rengasamy Vs the District Collector

Aandavar Puthiram Vs the Commissioner