Disposed

J.Rajkumar v. the District Collector

Madras HC5 Jul 2017WP(MD)/8596/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus. The Court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for gravel removal referencing a prior field inspection report and pass appropriate orders within four weeks without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders within four weeks, giving due notice to the petitioner.

J.Rajkumar Vs the District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.07.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.8596 of 2017

¶7

J.Rajkumar ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶10

The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (WRO), Thamirabarani Basin, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to give necessary permission to the petitioner for removal of gravel from Kadambakulam situated at S.No.1104/1 of Thenthiruperai Village, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi District based on petitioner's representation dated 15.03.2017.

¶12

For Petitioner

¶13

... Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu

¶14

For Respondents 1 & 2 ... Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah Government Advocate

¶15

* * * * * ORDER

¶16

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to give necessary permission to the petitioner for removal of gravel from Kadambakulam situated at S.No.1104/1 of Thenthiruperai Village, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi District based on petitioner's representation dated 15.03.2017.

¶17

Heard Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents.

¶18

The facts of the case is that pursuant to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ de-silting work to be undertaken, the petitioner made a representation dated 15.03.2017, for removal of gravel, which is

¶19

¶20

kept pending, without passing any orders by the first respondent. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, earlier the concerned Thasildar filed a field inspection report dated 13.09.2011, who in turn, recommended the claim of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to direct the 1^st respondent to consider the said representation dated 15.03.2017 in the light of the field inspection report submitted by the Thasildar on 13.09.2011 and pass appropriate orders on merits, after due notice to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned is free to deal with the matter on its own merit as per law.

¶22

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶27

The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (WRO), Thamirabarani Basin, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.

¶28

+1 CC to THE SPECIAL GOVENRMENT PLEADER, SR No. 64033. +1 CC to M/s.A.S.VAIGUNTH, Advocate, SR No. 63585

¶29

GK/SMN

¶30

PSM/JC/SAR1/13.07.2017/2P/5C

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.8596 of 2017 05.07.2017

¶32

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

J.Rajkumar v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Rajkumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Y.Perinbam Vs the District Collector

N.E.Prakasham Vs the Tahsildar

Deepam Trust, Vs the Commissioner

Kalyani Vs the District Collector

Napoleon, S/O.Mariappan, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Salma Beevi Vs the Conservator of Forest