Disposed

Chamundi Bose v. the Dist Collector

Madras HC23 Jun 2021WP(MD)/8349/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition requesting removal of Karuvelam trees obstructing a public pathway to aid villagers and tractor movement. The Court directed Respondents 2 and 3 to inspect the area with the Village Panchayat President and petitioner within six weeks to work out removal modalities, answering the cost question by suggesting public funds or volunteer assistance.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as the Court directed respondents to inspect the area and work out removal modalities within six weeks.

Chamundi Bose Vs the Dist Collector — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.8349 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23.06.2021

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.8349 of 2021

¶7

Chamundi Bose .. Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶10

The Block Development Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶11

Village Administrative Officer, Vellaneri Village, Narikudi block, Tiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to remove the Karuvelam trees in the public path way, as represented by the petitioner in the representation dated 12.02.2020.

¶13

For Petitioner : Ms.Chamundi Bose, (Party in Person) For respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran, Government Counsel

¶14

ORDER

¶15

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

¶16

Heard Ms.Chamundi Bose, learned counsel-the petitioner appearing in person and Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶17

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

¶18

1/3

¶19

W.P.(MD).No.8349 of 2021

¶20

The writ petition has been filed praying for a direction upon the respondents to remove the Karuvelam trees in the public path way, by taking note of the petitioner's representation dated 12.02.2020. In the representation and as well as in the submission before us, the petitioner highlighted that to a small extent of area, a few Karuvelam trees have grown and if the same is cleared and the path way is widened, it will help the villagers to transport agricultural produce and also facilitate free ingress and egress, movement of tractors etc.

¶21

It is submitted that pursuant to the notice ordered by this Court in this writ petition, the President of the Village Panchayat had visited the area when the petitioner was present and appears to have been satisfied that if the Karuvelam trees are removed, it will facilitate the public of two villagers. The question is who is to bear the cost of removal of those Karuvelam trees. According to the petitioner, the removal of Karuvelam trees will cost no prejudice to anybody, on the contrary, it will be helpful for the villagers and the agriculturists to move freely across the path way and there is sufficient land, all of which are Government poramboke lands. The decision to remove the trees should be taken by the respondents 2 and 3.

¶22

So far as the cost of removal of trees is concerned, namely, the cost that may be incurred for the purpose of hiring equipment etc., can be borne by the public funds or it can be done based on assistance given by persons like the petitioner, who are of the view that such removal of Karuvelam trees will be in public interest.

¶23

We direct the respondents 2 and 3 to inspect the area in question in the presence of the President of the Village Panchayat as well as the petitioner, after issuing notice to the petitioner and work out the modalities of removal of Karuvelam trees. This direction be complied with within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

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

¶25

// True Copy //

¶26

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶27

pkn

¶28

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

¶29

2/3

¶30

W.P.(MD).No.8349 of 2021

¶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 . To: 1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶32

The Block Development Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶33

Village Administrative Officer, Vellaneri Village, Narikudi block, Tiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District. +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-20295[F] dated 25/06/2021 )

¶34

W.P.(MD) No.8349 of 2021 23.06.2021

¶35

PM(CO) TR(29.06.2021) 3P 5C

¶36

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

¶37

3/3

Chamundi Bose v. the Dist Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chamundi Bose v. the Dist Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subramanian Vs the Addl.Registrar General

Kremmer Sandegren Foundation Pattukottai Vs The Inspector General of Registration

M/S. Asl Represented by Its Vs the Branch Manager

Chandrasekaran.M Vs the Dist.Collector

Pandidurai Vs the District Collector

M.Murugeswari, Vs the Dist.Collector (General)