Disposed

Mr.R.Arulvel v. Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi Ias.

Madras HC7 Jun 2019SUB APPL/647/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sub-application in a contempt petition for leave to challenge non-compliance with a writ order regarding land encroachments. The court directed respondents to strictly follow the earlier order to consider representations and provide hearings to affected parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to scrupulously follow the order in W.P.No.17319 of 2012 dated 09.07.2012 within two months.

Mr.R.Arulvel Vs Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi Ias. — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.06.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

Sub Application (OS) No.647 of 2016
in Contempt Petition SR.No.34063 of 2016
R.Arulvel ... Petitioner
- Vs -
1.Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi I.A.S.
District Collector, Kancheepuram District
Kancheepuram.
2.Dr.A.Arun Thamburaj, I.A.S.,
The Revenue Divisional Officer
Kancheepuram Revenue Division
Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Petition under Section 151 of C.P.C., to grant leave to file the contempt petition
in W.P.No.17319 of 2012.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ramalingam
For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai, Government Advocate

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

(Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.)

¶9

This petition has been filed by the petitioner Mr.R.Arulvel, seeking leave to file contempt petition, alleging willful disobedience of the order and direction in W.P.No.17319 of 2012 dated 09.07.2012. The said writ petition was filed by one Thamizh Amudhan,

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

¶12

praying for a direction to the respondents to remove the encroachments and recover the lands in Survey No.347, Athanoor Village, Kancheepuram District. The writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 09.07.2012, by directing the respondents to consider the representation / complaint given by the writ petitioner and his wife. It was also made clear that the respondents, before passing final orders, should give an opportunity of hearing to the alleged encroachers or any other individual concerned. Thus, it could be seen that no positive direction was issued to the respondents to evict the encroachers based on the allegation made by the writ petitioner that they are illegally occupying the water body.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the present petition, the petitioner Mr.R.Arulvel would state that he is a third party to the writ petition, a resident of the village and has a common grievance against the illegal encroachments. The petitioner Arulvel does not state as to why the original writ petitioner has not moved this Court alleging disobedience of the order and direction of this Court. Further, we find that even

¶14

on the last occasion, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶15

Mr.Elumalai, learned Government Advocate submits that he has been

¶16

telephonically informed that action has been initiated and orders are being passed, after giving opportunity to the alleged encroachers.

¶17

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶18

¶19

In the light of the above, we dispose of this application, directing the respondents

¶20

to scrupulously follow the order and direction issued in the writ petition No.17319 of 2012 dated 09.07.2012, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

(T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.)
07-06-2019
KST
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
To
1.Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi I.A.S.
District Collector, Kancheepuram District
Kancheepuram.
2.Dr.A.Arun Thamburaj, I.A.S.,
The Revenue Divisional Officer
Kancheepuram Revenue Division
Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District.

¶22

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶23

¶24

T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.

¶25

kst

¶26

Sub Application No.647 of 2016
in Cont.Petition SR.No.34063 of 2016

¶27

07.06.2019

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

Mr.R.Arulvel v. Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi Ias.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.R.Arulvel v. Mrs.R.Gajalakshmi Ias.

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

M/S Eid Parry (India) Ltd. Vs the Asst Commissioner of

The Government Telecommunication Employees Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs the Income Tax Officer

C.Shrinivasan Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Commissioner of I.T Vs Parry and Company Limited

Principal Commissioner of Vs M/S.Craftsman Automation Pvt.

Principal Commissioner of Vs M/S.Craftsman Automation Pvt.