Dismissed

S.Packiam v. the District Collector

Madras HC18 Oct 2019WP(MD)/22036/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 regarding encroachment on Government Porampoke land. Since encroachers were not impleaded, the Court declined to issue positive directions. It permitted the petitioner to pursue its representation before respondents.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; petitioner permitted to pursue representation before respondents.

S.Packiam Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.22036 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.10.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI

¶5

W.P.[MD]No.22036 of 2019

S.Packiam

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector,

¶10

Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶12

Tirunelveli Division,

¶13

Kokirakulam, Tirunelveli.

¶14

3.The Tahsildhar,

¶15

Palaiyamkottai Taluk, Kokirakulam, Tirunelveli. : Respondents

¶16

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the encroachment made in the Government Porampoke land in Survey No.641/9, Senkulam Village, Palaiyamkottai Taluk and Tirunelveli District within the time stipulated by this Court by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.07.2019.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balakrishnan

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian

¶19

Special Government Pleader

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

[ Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶22

By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶23

2.Heard Mr.R.Balakrishnan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶24

3.The petitioner seeks for a direction upon the respondents to remove the encroachment made in the Government Porampoke land in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Survey No.641/9, Senkulam Village, Palaiyamkottai Taluk and

¶25

1/2

¶26

W.P.[MD]No.22036 of 2019

¶27

Tirunelveli District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.07.2019.

¶28

4.In the present writ petition, the writ petitioner has not impleaded the alleged encroachers. Hence, we cannot issue any positive direction in this writ petition.

¶29

5.Hence, we dispose of this Writ Petition by permitting the writ petitioner to pursue his representation before the respondents which shall be dealt with in accordance with law. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶31

// True Copy //

¶32

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶33

¶34

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶35

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶36

Tirunelveli Division, Kokirakulam, Tirunelveli.

¶37

3.The Tahsildhar, Palaiyamkottai Taluk, Kokirakulam, Tirunelveli.

¶38

+1 CC to Mr.R.BALAKRISHNAN, Advocate ( SR-92956[F] dated 18/10/2019 )

¶39

+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-93238[F] dated 21/10/2019 )

¶40

Order made in W.P.[MD]No.22036 of 2019 Dated : 18.10.2019

¶41

¶42

MK (04.11.2019) 2P 6C

¶43

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

¶44

2/2

S.Packiam v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Packiam 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

N.Geethanjali Vs the District Collector

The Roya Sundaram Alliance Vs S.Rajeshmahadevan

A.Wilson Vs the District Collector

S.Shanmuga Sundara Vs v.Arumugam,Executive Engineer

R.Nallathambi Vs The District Collector

N.Balan Vs the Tamilnadu Public Service Commission