Disposed

K.Ponnusamy v. The District Collector

Madras HC5 May 2023WP/13645/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner challenged the inaction of revenue authorities regarding alleged encroachment on allotted land. The court disposed of the petition directing the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representations on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representations on merits and communicate a decision within eight weeks.

K.Ponnusamy Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 05.05.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

K.Ponnusamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Vengikkal, Tiruvannamalai – 606 604.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Thanarampattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District – 606 707.

¶12

3.The Revenue Inspector, Tandarmpattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District – 606 707. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the first and second respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representations dated 12.12.2022 and 19.12.2022 by directing the third respondent to survey the petitioner's land at Survey No.37/10 and 37/12 measuring an extent of 63 cents and 7 cents respectively and comprised in Patta No.339, Sadhakuppam Village, Thandarampattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District and earmark the boundaries of the same.

¶14

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

¶15

1/5

¶16

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶17

For Petitioner : Ms.K.Nithyashree For Respondents : Ms.R.L.Karthikaa, Government Advocate

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of

¶20

a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the representations of the petitioner dated 12.12.2022 and 19.12.2022 and direct the third respondent to survey the petitioner's land in Survey No.37/10 and 37/12 measuring an extent of 63 cents and 7 cents, respectively, situated at Sadhakuppam Village, Thandarampattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District and earmark the boundaries.

¶21

The case of the petitioner is that he was allotted the lands in question by the Government of Tamil Nadu in the year 1989 and the said lands situate adjacent to the lands of his sisters in Survey Nos.37/11 and 37/13. During the year 2011, the petitioner's sister Kullammal, who is the owner of the land in Survey No.37/11, sold her land to one Buwaneswari and the said Buwaneswari is now attempting to earmark boundaries for the said land by encroaching the petitioner's lands. The petitioner has submitted a representation dated 12.12.2022 to the first respondent seeking to direct the

¶22

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

¶23

2/5

¶24

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶25

third respondent to survey the petitioner's lands and earmark the boundaries. Despite receipt of the said representation, the first respondent has not taken any action till date. Hence, the petitioner has been constrained to file the present writ petition.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that ends of justice would be met if a direction is given to the respondent authorities to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 12.12.2022 and 19.12.2022, as expeditiously as possible.

¶27

Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents

¶28

submitted that the first respondent/District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, is the competent authority to consider the representations of the petitioner and, if eight weeks' time is granted, the first respondent will consider the representations of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.

¶29

Considering the limited prayer now sought by learned counsel for the petitioner, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 12.12.2022 and 19.12.2022 on merits and

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶31

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶32

in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt

¶33

of a copy of this order and communicate a decision thereon to the petitioner.

¶34

There will be no order as to costs.

¶35

05.05.2023

¶36

Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sasi/bbr

¶37

¶38

1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Vengikkal, Tiruvannamalai – 606 604.

¶39

2.The Tahsildar, Thanarampattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District – 606 707.

¶40

3.The Revenue Inspector, Tandarmpattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District – 606 707.

¶41

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

¶42

4/5

¶43

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶44

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J

¶45

sasi/bbr

¶46

W.P.No.13645 of 2023

¶47

05.05.2023

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

K.Ponnusamy v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ponnusamy 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

K.Geetharani Vs the Superintendent of GST and Central Excise

Ramu Vs the State Rep by Its

Taysma Shashikumar Shetty Vs the Inspector of Police

N.Bagavathy Vs The District Collector

Hemal Arun Mehta Vs the Directorate of Enforcement

R.Purushothaman Vs The Inspector General of Registration