Disposed

R.Vimalarani v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Oct 2023WP/17355/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus directing municipal authorities to demolish unauthorized commercial construction by the neighboring 4th respondent. The Court, avoiding merits, directed authorities to afford a personal hearing to both parties regarding the building plan application and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents 1-3 to afford a personal hearing to the petitioner and 4th respondent while considering the building plan application within eight weeks.

R.Vimalarani Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17.10.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.No.17355 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.18390 of 2021

¶7

R.Vimalarani ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. 1. The District Collector Collectorate, Salem.

¶9

The Deputy Collector

¶10

Town Panchayat, Collectorate, Salem District.

¶11

The Executive Officer

¶12

Tammapatti Municipality Office, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District.

¶13

4. C. Prasanan Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1 to 3 respondents to act up on the petitioner representation dated 12.07.2021 and to take appropriate action for demolition of the unauthorized commercial construction of the 4th respondent premises which is situated in S.No. 375/21 Koneripatti Village, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District

¶15

Page No:1/5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajkumar For Respondents : Mr.Stalin Abimanyu

¶19

Additional Government Pleader for RR1 & 2 Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar for R3 Mr.R.Nalliyappan for R4

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(Order of the Court was made by J.Nisha Banu,J.)

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to

¶23

direct the respondents 1 to 3 to act upon the petitioner’s representation dated 12.07.2021 and to take appropriate action for demolition of the unauthorized

¶24

commercial construction of the 4^th respondent premises, situated in S.No.375/21, Koneripatti Village, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District.

¶25

2.It is averred in the affidavit of the Writ Petition that the petitioner owns the property bearing S.No.375/19, 375/20 in Koneripatti Village,

¶26

Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District. According to the petitioner, the 4^th respondent is his adjacent landowner, situated at the same Village in

¶27

S.No.375/21. Further, it is averred in the affidavit that the 4^th respondent without obtaining any permission from the official respondent, put up unauthorized construction in his property and also encroached upon the

¶28

Page No:2/5

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶31

petitioner’s property. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation dated 12.07.2021 before the respondents 1 to 3, requesting them to take appropriate action on the unauthorized construction, put up by the 4^th respondent. Since no action has been taken by the official respondents, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition, seeking the above relief.

¶32

3.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 3^rd respondent filed status report stating that the 3^rd respondent has issued notice to the 4^th respondent in Na.Ka.No.430/2021/A1 dated 21.07.2021, to get permission along with blueprint plan for the alleged construction, within 3 days from the date of receipt of that notice. After receipt of the said notice, the

¶33

4^th respondent stopped construction and applied for building plan approval, before the 3^rd respondent. He would further submit that due to the pendency of this Writ Petition, his application for Plan Approval is kept pending by the

¶34

3^rd respondent.

¶35

4.Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader, this Court

¶36

Page No:3/5

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶39

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directs the respondents 1 to 3, to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the 4^th respondent, while considering the building plan application filed by the 4^th respondent and pass orders in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No

¶41

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶42

(J.N.B.,J.) (N.M.,J.)

¶43

17.10.2023 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No Jer To 1. The District Collector Collectorate, Salem. 2. The Deputy Collector Town Panchayat, Collectorate, Salem District.

¶44

The Executive Officer Tammapatti Municipality Office, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District.

¶45

Page No:4/5

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶48

J.NISHA BANU,J. and N.MALA,J.

¶49

Jer

¶50

W.P.No.17355 of 2021

¶51

17.10.2023

¶52

Page No:5/5

¶53

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

R.Vimalarani v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vimalarani 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

M.Chinnu Vs The Commissioner

R.Nanjundan Vs District Collector

M.Sadasivam Vs Union of India

M/s. Sree Kavi Chamber Bricks Vs The Principal secretary to Government

Sri Sayee Vivekananda Vidyalaya Vs Tamil Nadu Private Schools Fee Determination Committee

D.M.Rajaselvi Vs The Chairman and Principal Secretary