Dismissed

R.Thangavel, S/O.Ramasamy, v. the District Collector

Madras HC23 Nov 2018WP(MD)/21472/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a show-cause notice regarding land eviction. Court held the petition premature as petitioner was to reply first. Petition dismissed with liberty to file reply within one week and directions to respondents on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to send reply to show-cause notice within one week. Respondent directed to pass orders on merits.

R.Thangavel, S/O.Ramasamy, Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 22.11.2018

¶4

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI

¶5

R.Thangavel

¶6

: Petitioner Vs.

¶7

1.The District Collector, Karur, Karur District.

¶8

2.The Tahsildar, Karur, Karur District. : Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned eviction notice issued by the 2^nd respondent in Na.Ka.A4/4915/2018 dated 26.09.2018 and quash the same as illegal.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.I.Velpradeep For Respondents : Mr.R.Sethuraman, Special Government Pleader

¶11

O R D E R ***********

¶12

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

¶13

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging only a show-cause notice issued by the 2^nd respondent in Na.Ka.A4/4915/2018 dated 26.09.2018.

¶14

The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the land having an extent of 4.68 ares comprised in Survey Nos.652/5, 656 and 658 at Tandoni Village, Karur Taluk, Karur District. According to the petitioner, the revenue records reflect his name in patta No.815 for Survey Nos.625/5, 656 and 658 and he is cultivating the above said land and is in full possession and enjoyment.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

It is the further case of the petitioner that he is paying the charges of 'B'-memo without any default, till date. While so, suddenly, eviction notice was issued on 26.09.2018. Hence, the petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

¶18

On perusal of the impugned notice dated 26.09.2018, we find that it is only a show-cause notice and it is for the petitioner to send a proper reply. This writ petition is premature in nature. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the prayer sought for in the writ petition.

¶19

In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to send a reply to the showcause notice issued by the second respondent dated 26.09.2018, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such receipt, the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side)

¶21

/True Copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶23

¶24

1.The District Collector, Karur, Karur District.

¶25

2.The Tahsildar, Karur, Karur District.

¶26

+1 cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.96764.

¶27

Pm DS RSK SAR4 18 12 2018 2P 2P 4C

¶28

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.21472 of 2018

¶29

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

R.Thangavel, S/O.Ramasamy, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Thangavel, S/O.Ramasamy, 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

Pl.Lakshmanan, S/O.Palaniyandi Vs the District Collector

X.Arockiamary, Vs the District Collector

E.Senthil Vs S.Sridhar

A.Banu, W/O.K.Alexis, Vs the District Collector

Manjula Vs the Commissioner

Pankajam Vs the Superintendent of Police