Dismissed

Mr.M.K.Dhanraj, v. the Commissioner

Madras HC14 Dec 2020WP/525/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenging delay in granting construction permission for a second floor under Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. Court quashed delay and directed First Respondent to consider representation, enquire, and pass orders within eight weeks with notice to interested parties.

What did the court decide?

Directions to First Respondent to consider representation dated 28.11.2013, enquire, afford hearing opportunity, and pass orders within eight weeks.

Mr.M.K.Dhanraj, Vs the Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 14.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA

¶5

W.P.NO.525 OF 2014 AND

¶6

M.P.NO.1 OF 2014 (HEARD THROUGH VC)

¶7

M.K.Dhanraj .. Petitioner -vs1. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai. 2. The Executive Officer, Sri chennai Malleswarar and Kesava Perumal Kovil, NSC Bose Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai - 600 079 .. Respondents Prayer:

¶8

Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.11.2013 and pass orders within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶9

The prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.11.2013 and pass orders within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶10

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

¶11

It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioner is residing at First Floor in Door No.67/61, Perumal Koil Street, 1st Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai with his family for serveral years. Originally, the property belonged to the second respondent and subsequently, it got transferred in the name of the petitioner's father, by way of Deed of Partition, bearing Registration No.1308 of 1940. It is further stated that the said portion was not sufficient to accomodate his entire family and there was no basic amenties like water connection and sewerage facilities. Hence, the petitioner wants to construct the second floor of the said property, which is a vacant space having an extent of 726 sq.ft., Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation dated 28.11.2013 to the respondents through R.P.A.D, seeking to allocate and give a permission for construction of the second floor and the same was acknowledged by the respondents. But, till date, the respondents have not given permission for construction of the second floor along with separate electricity and water sewerage connection. Hence, the writ petition.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on either side, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.11.2013, enquire into the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the petitioner and the persons interested in this regard and by affording them an opportunity of personal hearing or virtual hearing, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶14

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶15

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶16

srn

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

¶20

The Executive Officer, Sri chennai Malleswarar and Kesava Perumal Kovil, NSC Bose Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai - 600 079

¶21

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.41187

¶22

W.P.No.525 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
AJB(CO)
CS/21/01/2021

¶23

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

Mr.M.K.Dhanraj, v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.M.K.Dhanraj, v. the Commissioner

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.P.Velumani Vs Joint Director/Assistant Director

RamanathSriram Vs The Union of India

N.Maragathavalli Vidhya Vs The Registrar of Birth and Death

K.Jagadeesan Vs the Union of India

A.Balasubramaniyan Vs The Director of Medical and Rural Health Services

M.Sankarappa Vs the District Collector