Dismissed

R. Subbulakshmi, v. the District Collector

Madras HC7 Jun 2022WP(MD)/11466/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a house allotment order favoring Muthuraj under Article 226, claiming eligibility. The Court dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner failed to prove they made an allotment application and that the selection list received Collector's approval.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands dismissed with no costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

R. Subbulakshmi, Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.11466 of 2011

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.06.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.(MD).No.11466 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.2 of 2011

R.Subbulakshmi

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶10

2.The Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶11

3.Thasildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

¶12

4.The Block Development Officer, Vembakkottai Panchayat Union, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

5.The President, Keezhanmarainadau Panchayat, Vembakkottai Panchayat Union, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶14

6.Muthuraj ... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned allotment order, dated Nil passed by the respondent Nos.2 to 5 herein in respect of allotment of houses to the sixth respondent as Periyar Memorial Samathuvapuram in Keezhanmaraimnadu Panchayat, Vembakkottai Union, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to allot a house to the petitioner in the said Samathuvapuram.

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

W.P.(MD).No.11466 of 2011

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Arunjeya Ram for M/s.Damodaran

¶20

For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.D.SasiKumar Additional Government Pleader For R-4 & R-5 : Mr.A.MuthuKaruppan For R-6 : Mr.T.Selvan(Legal Aid Counsel)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Writ Petition has been filed challenging an order of allotment of houses constructed in Samathuvapuram. The writ petitioner has restricted his prayer with regard to the allotment of house in favour of the sixth respondent alone. The petitioner has further prayed that he is also an eligible person and hence, a house should be allotted to him in the said Samathuvapuram.

¶23

A perusal of the writ affidavit shows that though a prayer has been sought for specifically as against the sixth respondent, there are no allegations as against the sixth respondent for cancelling the allotment made in his favour. Further, though the petitioner has contended that the selection list prepared by the committee has not been approved by the District Collector, counter filed by the fourth respondent indicates that the selection list was already approved by the District Collector and thereafter, the possession was handed over to the beneficiaries. The fourth respondent in his counter has further pointed out that the petitioner has not even made an application for allotment of a house in the Samathuvapuram. The application, dated 22.10.2010 found in the typed set of papers is not supported by any document to show that it was actually made to the Village Panchayat or sent by post.

¶24

In view of the above said circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere in the allotment order issued by the statutory authorities in favour of the beneficiaries. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS I)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

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

¶29

2/3

¶30

W.P.(MD).No.11466 of 2011

¶31

btr

¶32

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. 2.The Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 3.Thasildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Block Development Officer, Vembakkottai Panchayat Union, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District. 5.The President, Keezhanmarainadau Panchayat, Vembakkottai Panchayat Union, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District. +1 CC to M/s.T.SELVAN, Advocate ( SR-24446[F] dated 07/06/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-24611[F] dated 08/06/2022 ) Order made in W.P.(MD).No.11466 of 2011 07.06.2022 SS(14/06/2022) 3P 8C

¶33

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

¶34

3/3

R. Subbulakshmi, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Subbulakshmi, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Abimannan Vs the Branch Manager

Pmr Matriculation Higher Vs the District Registrar of

V. Shanmugananthan, Vs the District Revenue Officer

S. Manickam @ Lakshmi, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Singapulipandian Vs the District Collector

V.C. Vaithialingam, Vs the District Collector