Disposed

K.Palaniswamy v. The District Collector

Madras HC1 Dec 2020WP/16765/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged unauthorized constructions on disputed land. The Court did not decide on the merits or immediate demolition. It directed the Tahsildar to survey and inspect the site after putting all parties on notice within ten weeks to determine if encroachment exists. The petition was then disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directs 3rd Respondent to survey and inspect land SF.No.173 with the Surveyor after notice to relevant parties within ten weeks; to take necessary steps if encroachment is found.

K.Palaniswamy Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 01.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA

¶7

WP.No.16765/2020 & WMP.No.20776/2020

¶8

K.Palanisamy ..Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Collector
Coimbatore District,
Coimbatore.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Coimbatore.
3.The Tahsildar
Sulur, Coimbatore District.
4.The Administration
A/m.Shree Vasudevan/Shree Varna Devan Temple
SF.No.173, Pattinam Village
Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District. ..Respondents

¶9

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to demolish the unauthorised constructions put up by the 4^th respondent in SF.No.173, Pattinam Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District and restore the pathway by considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.10.2020.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.D.R.Arun Kumar
For RR 1 to 3 : Ms.R.J.Radhika
Government Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER

¶13

[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]

¶14

(1) By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal and is disposed of by this order.

¶15

(2)Ms.R.J.Radhika, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3

¶16

(3)The petitioner claims to be a resident of Amman Nagar, Pattinam, Coimbatore District and in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, would aver among other things that he owns agricultural lands in SF.No.186/3 of the said Village and for the purpose of ingress and egress to his agricultural land, the only route/way available is through SF.No.173. According to the petitioner, the 4^th respondent/Temple is in existence in a corner of SF.No.173 [part], occupying an area of 1 cent.

¶17

(4)The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the owners of M/s.Lakshmi Earth Movers and Winners Real Estates, viz., Mr.E.Prakash S/o.Eswaran and Tvl.K.Gothandapani, G.Devarajan S/o.Govindasamy, G.Karthikeyan S/o.Gopal and Ragunathan S/o.Ganesan, had started putting up permanent structures right across SF.No.173 without any authorisation / permission and that too, on a public land and the representation dated 23.10.2020 submitted in this regard, is yet to invoke any kind of response and therefore, the petitioner came forward to file the present writ petition.

¶18

(5)This Court heard the submissions of Ms.R.J.Radhika, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also perused the materials placed before it.

¶19

(6)Though the petitioner has prayed for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner, either in his representation or in this writ petition, directs the 3^rd respondent, with the help of the jurisdictional Surveyor, to survey and inspect the land in SF.No.173 of Pattinam Vilage with the aid of the relevant revenue records, after putting on notice, the petitioner as well as the 4^th respondent / Temple and if the result of the inspection disclose any encroachment on the said land/construction of unauthorised structures, the 3^rd respondent shall take necessary steps in accordance with law by also adhering to the principles of natural justice and complete the entire exercise within a period of ten weeks from the date

¶20

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

¶21

of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner, 4^th respondent as well as to the person/s concerned.

¶22

(7)The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶23

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS VIII)

¶24

/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
AP
To
1.The District Collector
Coimbatore District,
Coimbatore.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Coimbatore.
3.The Tahsildar
Sulur, Coimbatore District.
+1 CC to Mr. D.R. Arun Kumar, SR. No. 38783
+1 CC to Government Pleader, SR. No.38893
WP.No.16765/2020
SV(CO)
CAA(19/12/2020)

¶25

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

K.Palaniswamy v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Palaniswamy 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

K.Vidyasagar Vs The District Collector

R.Muniraj Vs The Tahsildar

N.Sundaram Vs The Principal Secretary /

Shanmugadurai I Vs Authorised Officer

The Authorized officer South Indian Bank Ltd., Vs The District Collector

R.Venkatesh Vs The Revenue