Disposed

Mayilsamy.P.P v. State Rep. by the District Collector

Madras HC16 Jun 2021WP(MD)/10140/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL under Article 226, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court directed the Tahsildar to issue notices and take immediate action to remove encroachments made in water channels and water bodies by specific respondents.

What did the court decide?

The fourth respondent was directed to take appropriate action within three weeks after issuing notice to respondents 6 to 17 to remove encroachments.

Mayilsamy.P.P Vs State Rep. by the District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.10140 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.06.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.P.(MD) No.10140 of 2021

¶3

P.P.Mayilsamy .. Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Dindigul. 2. The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District. 4. The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District. 5. The Block Development Officer, Office of the Block Development Officer, Reddiarchatram, Dindigul District. 6. Murugan 7. Murugan 8. Thirupathi Gounder 9. Ganesan 10. Alagammal 11. Vennila 12. Subbiyan 13. Muthusamy 14. Subramani 15. Jeyaprakash 16. Malathi 17. Muthusamy ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 29.08.2020 and consequently direct the first respondent to direct

¶4

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

¶5

1/3

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.10140 of 2021

¶7

the respondents 3 to 5 and to remove the encroachments in the odai in S.No.163 from the Mottaikardu and Pommankulam in S.No.159, Murunallikottai Panchayat, Sullerumbu Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District encroached by the respondents 6 to 17.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar

¶9

For respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran, Government Counsel for R1 to R5

¶10

ORDER

¶11

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

¶12

Heard Mr.R.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Government Counsel, appearing for the respondents 1 to 5.

¶13

The writ petitioner by way of this writ petition styled as a public interest litigation, seeks for a direction to remove the encroachment made in the water channel and waterbody by the respondents 6 to 17. The representations were considered by the authorities and request has been made by the fifth respondent to survey the area in question by proceedings dated 07.12.2020, sent by the Block Development Officer, Reddiarchatram, Dindigul District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul District, has also forwarded the complaint to the fourth respondent by proceedings dated 09.09.2020.

¶14

In the light of the request made by the said interdepartmental communication, the fourth respondent is directed to take appropriate action immediately and not later than three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after issuing notice to the respondents 6 to 17 and proceed in accordance with law.

¶15

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶16

Assistant Registrar (CSI)

¶17

// True Copy //

¶18

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶19

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

¶20

2/3

¶21

W.P.(MD) No.10140 of 2021

¶22

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 . pkn To: 1. The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Dindigul. 2. The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District. 4. The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District. 5. The Block Development Officer, Office of the Block Development Officer, Reddiarchatram, Dindigul District. +1 CC to M/s.R.SENTHIL KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-19361[F] dated 16/06/2021 ) W.P.(MD) No.10140 of 2021 16.06.2021 GS (23.06.2021) 3P 7C

¶23

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

¶24

3/3

Mayilsamy.P.P v. State Rep. by the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayilsamy.P.P v. State Rep. by 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

A. Lingappan, Vs G. Venkatasamy Naidu College

Hajee K.K.ibrahim Ali Hr.SEc.School Society Vs Hajee K.K.Ibrahim Ali Hr.Sec.School Society

The State of Tamilnadu Vs Y.Shyni

Selva Kumar.M Vs Union of India

M. Raju Vs the District Treasury Officer

Rajendran.S Vs the Registrar General