Sargunam .Y v. the District Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought writ to remove encroachment in a burial ground. During hearing, counsel for both sides submitted the encroachment was already removed. The High Court closed the writ petition with no costs awarded.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was closed with no costs as the alleged encroachment was claimed to have been removed.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P(MD) No.2948 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 16.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.P.(MD) No.2948 of 2022
Y.Sargunam
... Petitioner
-vs-
- The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.
- The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Thoothukudi District.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for removal of encroachment in burial ground requires further adjudication after respondents claimed encroachment was removed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Y.Sargunam
- respondent
The District Collector, Thoothukudi District
- respondent
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thoothukudi District
- respondent
The Thasildar, Sathankulam
- respondent
The President, Village Panchayat Office, Eluvaraimukki
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court