Dismissed

K.Anbazhagan v. The Union of India

Madras HC25 Jun 2019WP/4000/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed two writ petitions filed under Article 226 challenging a resolution to deviate the approved plan for a burial ground. The Court held that the meeting was not conducted by duly elected members and Panchayat cannot deviate state-approved plans, finding no merit in the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' prayer for quashing the resolution was dismissed. No order as to costs.

K.Anbazhagan Vs The Union of India — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 25.06.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.4000 and 4009 of 2019 and W.M.P.Nos.4457, 4459, 4465 & 4467 of 2019

¶6

K.Anbazhagan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.4000/19 K.Pavadai @ Segar ... Petitioner in W.P.No.4009/19

¶7

Versus
1. The Union of India,
Rep.by Secretary to Government,
Revenue Department,
Government of Puducherry,
Puducherry.

¶8

The District Collector, Collectorate building, Puducherry.

¶9

Ariyankuppam Commune Panchayat, Ariyankuppam, Puducherry. ... Respondents in both Wps.

¶10

COMMON PRAYER:

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records leading to the passing of impugned resolution dated 22.01.2009 passed by the 3^rd respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to create burial/cremation ground in the originally ear marked place as per G.O.Ms.No.29 dated 28.07.2003 issued by 1^st respondent.

¶12

For Petitioner in both WPs : Mr.A.Tamilvanan

¶13

For Respondents in both Wps.: Mr.A.V.Ramalingam

¶14

Addl.Government Pleader

¶15

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

¶16

COMMON ORDER

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶18

The petitioners herein, who are enjoying land adjacent to the burial ground apprehend that there is going to be deviation to the burial ground approved plan based on the resolution passed by some persons presided by the Panchayat President. Hence, they have approached this Court seeking Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the resolution passed by the persons on 22.01.2019 on the premise that the resolution was passed by the Board Members of the Ariyankuppam Commune Panchayat.

¶19

On perusal of the resolution, which is impugned in these writ petitions, this Court finds that it is not a resolution passed by the duly elected Panchayat Members of the Ariyankuppam village. In fact it is a meeting conducted in the Panchayat Office attended by the public and few elected members. Further, Panchayat cannot deviate the plan approved by the State.

¶20

This Court finds that no merits in these writ petitions accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Deputy Registrar (CJ Conf.)

¶23

//True Copy//

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

rpl To

¶26

The Union of India,

¶27

Rep.by Secretary to Government,

¶28

Revenue Department, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶29

The District Collector,

¶30

Collectorate building, Puducherry.

¶31

+2ccs to Mr.A.Tamilvanan, Advocate, S.R.No.52539, 52540 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.52531, 52532

¶32

W.P.Nos.4000 and 4009 of 2019 and W.M.P.Nos.4457, 4459, 4465 & 4467 of 2019

¶33

RGN(CO) CS/30/07/2019

¶34

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

K.Anbazhagan v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Anbazhagan v. The Union of India

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

Sri Nandhanam College Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

J.Jebasingh Vs The District Collector

T.Kanagaraj Vs The Principal

Anjalidevi, Vs The Correspondent

S.Ravi, Vs The Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies

Chinnaponnu Vs Executive Officer