Disposed

Varalakshmi, v. The District Collector

Madras HC8 Feb 2023WP/15984/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner regarding encroachment by the fifth respondent. Upon learning the petitioner had passed away, the Court granted liberty to the legal heirs to file a fresh representation, directing authorities to dispose of it within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to legal heirs to file fresh representation; authorities directed to consider same within four weeks.

Varalakshmi, Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.15984 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 08.02.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶7

Writ Petition No.15984 of 2017

¶8

Varalakshmi .. Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

The District Collector, Krishnagiri.

¶11

The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶14

Muniraj .. Respondents

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose the representation dated 16.03.2017 and consequently direct the respondents 2, 3 and 4 to take appropriate steps against the fifth respondent.

¶16

For Petitioner	:	M/s. R.Karthika
		for M/s N.Sureka
For R1 to R4	:	Mr.A.Selvendran
		Special Government Pleader
For R5	:	No appearance

¶17

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

1/4

W.P.No.15984 of 2017

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)

¶22

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the first respondent to remove the encroachment made by the fifth respondent and take appropriate action against him, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 16.03.2017.

¶23

Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is no more and hence liberty may be given to the legal heirs of the petitioner to approach the authorities concerned with a fresh representation, and on such filing, the same may be directed to be considered by the respondent authorities within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court, for which, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 has no serious objection.

¶24

3.In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which has not been seriously opposed on the side of the respondent authorities, this Court directs the legal heirs of the petitioner to file a fresh https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

2/4

¶26

W.P.No.15984 of 2017

¶27

representation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On making of such representation, the respondent authorities shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the all parties, within a period of eight weeks, thereafter.

¶28

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶29

[R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.] 08.02.2023

¶30

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No av

¶31

¶32

The District Collector, Krishnagiri.

¶33

The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri.

¶34

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶35

The Tahsildar, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶36

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

¶37

3/4

¶38

W.P.No.15984 of 2017

¶39

R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

¶40

¶41

Writ Petition No.15984 of 2017

¶42

08.02.2023

¶43

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

¶44

4/4

Varalakshmi, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varalakshmi, 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

Sakthipuram Makkal Nala sangam Vs Chennai Metropolitan development Authority

Masjid E-Khadeem Management committee Vs The Commissioner

Adhikesavareddy Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

K.Meena Vs The Registrar (General)

S.Ilavarasu Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

S.Velammal Vs Regional Deputy Commisioner