Partly allowed

Sathick Ali v. the Secretary to Government (Home Department)

Madras HC28 Sept 2020WP(MD)/10801/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court directed the first respondent to proceed with further action against unauthorized construction based on a notice from the sixth respondent and fixed the completion timeline within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

The first respondent was directed to further proceedings initiated by the sixth respondent's notice and complete them within eight weeks, adhering to natural justice and communicating the decision.

Sathick Ali Vs the Secretary to Government (Home Department) — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.10801 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.09.2020 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM

¶3

W.P.(MD)No.10801 of 2020 (Through Video conferencing)

Sathick Ali

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Secretary to Government (Home Department) Chief Minister Cell, Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009. 2.The District Collector Collectorate Ramanathapuram Ramanathapuram District. 3.The Director Municipalities and Panchayat & (Tamil Nadu Drinking Water Board) Kuralagam, Chennai – 600 108. 4.The Assistant Director Panchayat Union Administration Office Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. 5.The Tahsildar Taluk Office Thiruvadanai Ramanathapuram District. 6.The Executive Officer Thondi Panchayat Union Office Thondi, Thiruvadanai Taluk Ramanathapuram District. 7.Abdul Jaffar 8.Syed Ibrahim 9.Noorulla

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

1/4

¶11

W.P.(MD) No.10801 of 2020

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 5^th and 6^th respondents herein to remove the illegal encroachment and unauthorized construction made by the respondents 7 to 9 herein in Survey No.125/4 having extent of 1 acre, situated in Vilathumanakottai Village, Thondi Post, Karaikudi Sub District, Ramanathapuram District based on the petitioner representation dated 18.08.2020 within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthukumar For Respondents : Mr.B.Bagavathi,

¶14

Govt. Advocate for R1 to R5 Mr.N.Jayaram Sidharth for R6

¶15

ORDER

¶16

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

¶17

The petitioner, who is a resident of Pallivasal East Street, Thondi, Thirvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, came forward to file this writ petition stating, among other things, that his father possessed a land admeasuring to an extent of 1 acre in S.No.125/4, situate at Vilathumanakottai Village, Thondi Post, Ramanathapuram District and by way of succession, his legal heirs are in joint possession and enjoyment of the same. It is the specific case of the petitioner that his mother as well as his brother viz., Amjath Ali had colluded with the 7^th respondent and created a registered sale deed in his favour and taking advantage of the sale deed, respondents 7 to 9 are putting up unauthorised constructions on the landed property and the representation dated 18.08.2020 submitted, in this regard, has failed to invoke any kind of response and hence, came forward to file this Writ Petition.

¶18

Mr.B.Bagavathi, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Mr.N.Jeyaraman Sidharth, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.6.

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent would submit that the sixth respondent had initiated proceedings by sending notice dated 21.08.2020, in Na.Ka.No.377/2020, to the seventh respondent as to the alleged unauthorised development in the form of construction and also warned him as to the further action will be taken in terms of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920.

¶20

The said communication of 6^th respondent dated 21.08.2020 is taken on file and record.

¶21

This Court, taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

2/4

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.10801 of 2020

¶24

projected by the petitioner, either in his representation or in this writ petition, directs the first respondent to proceed further in terms of the notice of the sixth respondent dated 21.08.2020, addressed to the 7^th respondent, in accordance with law and also by adhering to the principles of natural justice and complete the said exercise within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision, taken to the petitioner as well as to the private respondents 7 to 9.

¶25

This Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No

¶26

costs.

¶27

Sd/Assistant Registrar (AS)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

vsm

¶31

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶32

¶33

1.The Secretary to Government (Home Department) Chief Minister Cell, Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009.

¶34

2.The District Collector Collectorate Ramanathapuram Ramanathapuram District.

¶35

3.The Director Municipalities and Panchayat & (Tamil Nadu Drinking Water Board) Kuralagam, Chennai – 600 108.

¶36

4.The Assistant Director Panchayat Union Administration Office Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶37

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

¶38

3/4

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.10801 of 2020

¶40

5.The Tahsildar Taluk Office Thiruvadanai Ramanathapuram District.

¶41

6.The Executive Officer Thondi Panchayat Union Office Thondi, Thiruvadanai Taluk Ramanathapuram District.

¶42

+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-18403[F] dated 29/09/2020 )

¶43

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.10801 of 2020 28.09.2020

¶44

VB (09.10.2020) 4P 8C

¶45

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

¶46

4/4

Sathick Ali v. the Secretary to Government (Home Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathick Ali v. the Secretary to Government (Home Department)

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

T.Sathish Vs A.3081 Agriculture Engineering Service

S.Tamilselvi Vs The Commissioner of Labour

The Government of Tamilnadu Vs M.Joseph Kala Denika

The Management, Vs the Presiding Officer

The Union of India, Vs Tara Exports, Rep.by Its

Iffco Toikio General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs S.Pitchaimary