Disposed

Gunasekaran v. the District Collector

Madras HC17 Nov 2022WP(MD)/1989/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226. The court directed the official respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding an alleged encroachment on Government land and remove it within 12 weeks, following due process of law.

What did the court decide?

A direction to the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.12.2021 on merits, remove any encroachment after affording opportunity to parties, and complete the exercise within

Gunasekaran Vs the District Collector — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 17.11.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

¶8

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

Gunasekaran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District collector, District Collector Office, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sathoor, Virudhunagar District.

¶14

3.The Thasildar, Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶15

4.The Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

5.The Village Panchayat President, Sundararajapuram Village Panchayat, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶19

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶20

6.Mr.Karuppaiah ... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 to 5 to take necessary legal action against the respondent No.6 and to remove the encroachment made in Government poramboku land situated in Survey Number 429/38, Sundarrajapuram Village, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District by considering the Petitioners representation dated 20.12.2021 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Honourable Court.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Karunanidhi For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan, Special Govt. Pleader for R1 to R5 No Appearance for R6

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

[Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.]

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 to 5 to take necessary legal action against the

¶26

Page 2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶29

respondent No.6 and to remove the encroachment made by him in the Government poramboke land situated in Survey No.429/38, Sundarrajapuram Village, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 20.12.2021, within a time frame.

¶30

2 . The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner made a representation on 20.12.2021 to the respondents 1 and 3 seeking to remove the aforesaid encroachment, till date, no steps have been taken by the respondents to remove the said encroachment. Hence, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶31

3 . The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 20.12.2021 would be considered by the official respondents and appropriate action will be taken to remove the encroachment, if any, by due process of law within a time frame, for which, the learned counsel for the petitioner is agreeable.

¶32

Page 3 of 6

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶36

4 . Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the authorities concerned to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 20.12.2021, on merits and in accordance with law. If there is any encroachment, the authorities concerned shall remove the same, after affording sufficient opportunity to all the parties concerned and by following due process of law. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶37

[R.M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.] vsm 17.11.2022

¶38

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶41

¶42

1.The District collector, District Collector Office, Virudhunagar District.

¶43

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sathoor, Virudhunagar District.

¶44

3.The Thasildar, Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶45

4.The Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶46

5.The Village Panchayat President, Sundararajapuram Village Panchayat, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶47

Page 5 of 6

¶48

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

¶49

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶50

R.MAHADEVAN, J. and J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

¶51

vsm

¶52

W.P.(MD) No.1989 of 2022

¶53

17.11.2022

¶54

_____________ Page 6 of 6_

¶55

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

Gunasekaran v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gunasekaran 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

Sargunam .Y Vs the District Collector

Vemban.K Vs the District Collector

P.Pandi Vs the District Collector

Krishnan Vs the District Collector

A.Sekar,S/O Anthonysamy, Vs the District Collector

Marikannu.v Vs the District Collector