Allowed

R.Vijayamohan v. The District Collector

Madras HC5 Dec 2022WP/4457/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dispelled the notion that a pending suit for injunction prevents the Municipal Corporation from acting on a representation regarding noise pollution. It ordered the District Collector and Commissioner to consider the petitioners representation and pass orders within two months.

What did the court decide?

The 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 13.08.2020 and pass orders on merits within two months.

R.Vijayamohan Vs The District Collector — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :05.12.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

R.Vijayamohan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector Coimbatore District Coimbatore

¶11

2.The Commissioner Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore

¶12

3.A.K.Steel 405, Bharatiyar Road Siddhaputhur Coimbatore 641044

¶13

4.J.K.Steel 405, Bharatiyar Road Siddhaputhur Coimbatore 641044

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1

¶16

Page No.1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

¶19

and 2 to consider the representation dated 13.08.2020 under Section 360, 361 and 362 of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act, 1981 and pass orders within a time frame.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.Dhanaram Ramachandran For Respondents : Mr.S.Rajesh Government Advocate for R1

¶21

Mr.K.Magesh for R2 Mr.M.N.Balakrishnan for R3 & R4

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 13.08.2020 under Section 360, 361 and 362 of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act, 1981 and pass orders within a time frame.

¶24

2.It is the case of the petitioner that the 3^rd and 4^th respondent

¶25

herein are illegally storing, cutting, welding, winding etc., of Aluminum, Steel, Copper using heavy machinery, thereby causing heavy noise disturbance to the neighbours and to the general public. Therefore, the

¶26

Page No.2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

¶29

petitioner has given representation to the 1^st respondent to take action under Section 360, 361 and 362 of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act, 1981. However, the said representation has not been considered mainly on the ground that a Suit for bare injunction is pending. Hence the petition.

¶30

3.Heard Mr.Dharam Ramachandran, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Rajesh, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶31

4.From the above submissions, it is clear that a Suit for bare injunction is pending before the Civil Court and now a representation has been given to conduct enquiry and to take action. Therefore, mere pendency of the Suit will not stop the respondents from considering the representation of the petitioner and to pass order on merits if there is any violation in accordance with law.

¶32

Page No.3 of 4

¶33

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

kas

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

5.Therefore the 1^st respondent is hereby directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 13.08.2020 and pass orders on merits as per law within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No

¶39

costs.

¶40

05.12.2022

¶41

kas Index : yes / no Internet : yes / no Speaking / Non speaking

¶42

To 1.The District Collector Coimbatore District Coimbatore

¶43

2.The Commissioner Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore

¶44

W.P.No.4457 of 2021

¶45

Page No.4 of 4

¶46

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

R.Vijayamohan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vijayamohan v. 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

Annamalai University Vs University Grants Commission

R. Dakshinamurthy Vs Nitin Kumar Dhirajlal Gokal

M/S.Raymond Pharmaceuticals Vs Union of India

P.Vasantha Vs The Commissioner

A.Thanikachalam Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Mrs.K.Shanmuga Rajam Vs The District Collector