Dismissed

Periyamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust v. The State rep by

Madras HC17 Oct 2022WP/27651/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a notice dated 17.9.2022 under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 removing encroachment, without giving a reply. The Court held that challenging such a notice under Article 226 without giving a reply is impermissible.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed for failure to give a reply to the impugned notice.

Periyamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust Vs The… — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17.10.2022

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶8

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶9

Periyamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust, rep. by its Founder R.Govardhanan, No.9, pachaiyamman Koil Street, Bharathi Nagar, Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043.

¶10

.. Petitioner

¶11

¶12

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Chengelput, Chengelput District.

¶13

2.The Thasildhar, Pallavaram Taluk Office, Pallavaram Taluk, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu District.

¶14

3.The Revenue Inspector, Pallavaram Revenue Office, Pallavaram Taluk, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu District.

¶15

_____________ Page 1 of 6_

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶18

4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Department) Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶19

5.The Chief Conservator of Forests, (Chennai Circle),

¶20

No.259, Anna Salai, DMS Compound, 3^rd Floor, Teynampet, Chennai-600 006.

¶21

6.The Conservator of Forests, X5C6*F9X, Pachiyamman Nagar, Pallavaram, St. Thomas Mount-cum-Pallavaram, Tambaram (Range), Chennai-600 043.

¶22

7.The Inspector of Police, Pallavaram Police Station, Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043. .. Respondents

¶23

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the third respondent notice dated 17.9.2022 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondents from interfering with Periamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust, registered at Sub-Registrar Office at Pallavaram on 15.07.2013 in Document No.176/iv/2013.

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶27

For the Petitioner : Mr.K.Jayakumar For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 7

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)

¶30

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned notice dated 17.9.2022 issued under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 [for short, “ the Act of 1905 ”] calling upon the petitioner to remove the encroachment made in Survey No.341/9, T.S.No.1/1 of Zamin Pallavaram, classified as “malai poramboke” to the extent of 0.01.10 hectares; 0.00.20 hectares; 0.00.09 hectares respectively.

¶31

Admittedly, the petitioner has not given any reply to the impugned notice issued under Section 7 or challenged the same

¶32

Page 3 of 6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶35

before the competent authority as per the provisions of the Act of 1905. If really, the petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of the impugned notice, the petitioner ought to have given reply within the time stipulated therein. Challenge to the impugned notice invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, without giving reply, is impermissible.

¶36

The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. However,

¶37

liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out the remedy in manner known to law. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.26927 of 2022 is closed.

¶38

(T.R., ACJ.) (D.K.K., J.) 17.10.2022 Index : Yes/No bbr

¶39

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶42

¶43

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Chengelput, Chengelput District.

¶44

2.The Thasildhar, Pallavaram Taluk Office, Pallavaram Taluk, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu District.

¶45

3.The Revenue Inspector, Pallavaram Revenue Office, Pallavaram Taluk, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu District.

¶46

4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Department) Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶47

5.The Chief Conservator of Forests, (Chennai Circle), No.259, Anna Salai, DMS Compound, 3^rd Floor, Teynampet, Chennai-600 006.

¶48

6.The Conservator of Forests, X5C6*F9X, Pachiyamman Nagar, Pallavaram, St. Thomas Mount-cum-Pallavaram, Tambaram (Range), Chennai-600 043.

¶49

7.The Inspector of Police, Pallavaram Police Station, Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043.

¶50

_____________ Page 5 of 6_

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

¶53

T.RAJA, ACJ. AND D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.

bbr

W.P.No.27651 of 2022

17.10.2022

_____________ Page 6 of 6_

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Periyamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust v. The State rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periyamalai Bala Murugan Educational Charitable Trust v. The State rep by

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

Amco Traders Vs Union of India

The Divisional Manager Vs M/S. Indian Potash Ltd.

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes and Hindu Religious Endowments Departmen Vs Girija

N.Shanmugham Vs The District Collector

G.Arivazhagan Vs The Secretary to Government

Pmn Mohan Krishnaa Vs The Principal Secretary