Dismissed

Ganeshan.S.K v. Commissioner of Land Administration

Madras HC8 Feb 2021WP(MD)/2165/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court held that the petitioner lacked locus standi to represent the petitioner Chathiram without filing documents authorizing him to act as the manager and without providing supporting materials.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Ganeshan.S.K Vs Commissioner of Land Administration — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.2165 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.02.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.2165 of 2021

¶7

S.K.Ganeshan .. Petitioner Vs

¶8

1.Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 2.The District Collector, Dindigul District. 3.The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul. .. Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent herein to dispose of the representation dated 13.03.2020 made to him through the Assistant Land Tax Officer in his office.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chandrabose For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramesh Special Government Pleader

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition for the simple reason that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present writ petition and he has not chosen to file any materials to show that he is the present Manager of the petitioner Chathiram and more so, he has not filed any relevant documents, authorizing him to file the present writ petition on behalf of the petitioner Chathiram. This Court therefore finds the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present writ petition.

¶13

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

¶14

1/2

¶15

W.P.(MD)No.2165 of 2021

¶16

2.In the absence of any explanation forthcoming in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar (AD-II)

¶18

// True Copy //

¶19

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶20

mm To 1.Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 2.The District Collector, Dindigul District. 3.The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul. +1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-4012[F] dated 09/02/2021 ) VB (22.02.2021) 2P 5C

¶21

W.P.(MD)No.2165 of 2021 08.02.2021

¶22

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

¶23

2/2

Ganeshan.S.K v. Commissioner of Land Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganeshan.S.K v. Commissioner of Land Administration

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

Ganesan.S Vs the District Collector

Sakthivel Vs the District Collector

Manickam.S Vs the District Collector

Sakthivel Vs The Tahsildar

Mohamed Shafeek.N Vs the Controller of Examinations.

James @ Jerome. a Vs the District Collector