Disposed

Chinnasamy v. the District Collector

Madras HC13 Nov 2018WP(MD)/22700/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking mandatory directions for the respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 29.10.2018 regarding a notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act. Court disposed of the petition directing third respondent to consider representation with a hearing opportunity within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of directing the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.10.2018 by affording an opportunity of hearing and pass appropriate orders on merits withi

Chinnasamy Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.11.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.THARANI W.P.(MD)No.22700 of 2018

Chinnasamy

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.

¶9

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakumal,

¶10

Theni District.

¶11

3.The Tahsildar,

¶12

Office of the Tahsildar,

¶13

Theni,

¶14

Theni District. : Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.10.2018.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeeshpandian

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.M.Jeyakumar

¶18

Additional Government Pleader

¶19

ORDER

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

The Petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.10.2018.

¶23

2.Heard Mr.M.Jegadeeshpandian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Jeyakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶24

3.Today when the matter was taken up for consideration, it is pointed out by the learned Additional Government Pleader that already the respondents have issued notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, for which, the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ has also sent a reply by way of representation dated 29.10.2018 and

¶25

the same is pending before the second respondent.

¶26

¶27

4.Since already reply was given by the petitioner, we are of the opinion that there is no need to keep the writ petition pending and the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.10.2018 by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the necessary parties and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not touched the merits or claim made by the petitioner. No costs.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar(RECORDS)

¶30

/True Copy/

¶31

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶32

¶33

The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.

¶34

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakumal, Theni District.

¶35

The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Theni, Theni District.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.M.Jegadeeshpandian,Advocate Sr.No.95065

¶37

¶38

KM/PM/SAR1/07.12.2018/2P/5C

¶39

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.22700 of 2018 Dated: 13.11.2018

¶40

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

Chinnasamy v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnasamy 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

V.C.Ganesan Vs the District Collector

Dhanalakshmi, Vs the District Collector

Sarathambal, Vs the District Collector

J.Mahamudha Banu Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.Arumugam Vs the District Collector

The South Indian Bank Vs the District Collector