A writ petition was filed seeking a mandate to remove an alleged encroachment on government land. The court dismissed the petition as the fourth respondent proposed regularisation of the land based on a G.O., and the petitioner did not refute this submission.
The Writ Petition is dismissed.
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.4778 of 2020
3BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.P.(MD) No.4778 of 2020
R.Venkatesh
... Petitioner
Vs.
4.S.Dhamodharan ... Respondents
_____________ Page 1 of 4_
W.P.(MD) No.4778 of 2020
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to take appropriate action to remove the encroachment made in Government Poramboke Land in Sy.No.208/8 in Govinda Nagaram, Theni District by the 4th respondent herein on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2020 within the time.
For Petitioner : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.V.Nirmal Kumar, Govt Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr.R.G.Shankar Ganesh for R4
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.]
This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to take appropriate action to remove the encroachment made in Government Poramboke Land in S.No.208/8 in Govinda Nagaram, Theni District by the 4th respondent herein on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2020 within a time frame.
Page 2 of 4
2
2 . There is no representation for the petitioner.
W.P.(MD) No.4778 of 2020
3 . Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 has produced the proceedings of the third respondent addressed to him and submitted that the encroachment of fourth respondent in the place in question has been proposed to be regularised in view of G.O.(Ms)No.318, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 30.08.2019 and patta is also proposed to be issued to the fourth respondent and therefore, removal of encroachment by the fourth respondent does not arise.
4 . The aforesaid submission of the learned Government Advocate is not
refuted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5 . In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
[R.M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.]
vsm
09.11.2022
Page 3 of 4
W.P.(MD) No.4778 of 2020
R.MAHADEVAN, J. and J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
vsm
To
W.P.(MD) No.4778 of 2020
09.11.2022
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the authorities should remove the encroachment by the fourth respondent on government land.
R.Venkatesh
The District Collector, Theni District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District
The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Theni
S.Dhamodharan
R.Mahadevan
J.Sathya Narayana Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
