Partly allowed

T.Senthilkumar v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Aug 2023WP/2978/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought a mandatory direction for authorities to act on a representation regarding alleged illegal construction by a neighboring party on vacant land. The court directed the administrative respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation within eight weeks without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider and pass orders on petitioner's representation dated 14.12.2020 within eight weeks; case disposed of.

T.Senthilkumar Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 17.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.No. 2978 of 2021

¶7

T.Senthilkumar S/o. Thimmireddy, ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The District Collector Collectorate, Salem District, Salem.

¶10

The Block Development Officer, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District.

¶11

The President, Chiddur Village Panchayat, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District.

¶12

Tmt. Chinnamayili ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action on the representation of the petitioner dated 14.12.2020 and prevent the illegal construction of the 4^th respondent in her vacant land in survey number 174 / 1A2 at Chiddur Bit - I Village, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District.

¶14

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

¶15

Page 1/6

¶16

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Kulanthaivel For Respondents : Mr.P.Gurunathan Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader for R2 Mr.S.V.Durai Solaimalai for R3 for R4- No Appearance

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.,) This Writ Petition has been filed, for issuance of Writ of

¶20

Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action on

¶21

the representation of the petitioner dated 14.12.2020 and prevent the illegal construction of the 4^th respondent in her vacant land in survey number 174 / 1A2 at Chiddur Bit - I Village, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District.

¶22

2.It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased agricultural lands

¶23

measuring 34 ½ cents in new survey number 174/1A1 at Chiddur Bit – I, Village, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District, through the registered sale deed dated 13.05.2020 and presently the petitioner cultivating in the said agricultural lands. Petitioner's vendor originally owned 51 cents of

¶24

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

¶25

Page 2/6

¶26

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶27

agricultural lands in Survey No.174/1A and before he purchase the said agricultural lands, the vendor formed layouts in the said agricultural lands of entire 51 cents, divided the same into several housing plots and laid pathways in between the plots without any approval and planning permission from any authorities. The vendor also sold one plot measuring 1147 sq.ft to the 4^th respondent, in the year 2010 as a vacant land.

¶28

3.In the revenue records, entire 51 cents of lands were classified as agricultural lands and the plot measuring 1147 sq.ft., sold to the 4^th respondent has never been classified as housing site. While so, the 4^th respondent started constructing a house building, without any approval or planning from the authorities concerned. Since the petitioner's agricultural lands are surrounded next to the 4^th respondent's plot, he could not do the agricultural activities in his land and it causes much inconvenience for cultivation and related operation. Therefore, the petitioner sent a detailed representation to the respondents 1 to 3 on 14.12.2020 to take action on the illegal construction put up by the 4^th respondent, despite receiving the said representation, the respondents 1

¶29

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

¶30

Page 3/6

¶31

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶32

to 3 have not taken any steps to prevent the illegal construction of the 4^th respondent. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶33

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if a direction is issued to the respondents 1 to 3, to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 14.12.2020, within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court.

¶34

5.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 2^nd respondent would submit that the respondents are ready and willing to take action on the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997 and sought for eight weeks time.

¶35

6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directs the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 14.12.2020, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

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

¶37

Page 4/6

¶38

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶39

7.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶40

No costs.

¶41

(J.N.B., J.) (N.M., J.) Index : Yes / No 17.08.2023 Internet : Yes / No Jer

¶42

¶43

The District Collector Collectorate, Salem District, Salem.

¶44

The Block Development Officer, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District. 3. The President, Chiddur Village Panchayat, Idappadi Taluk, Salem District.

¶45

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

¶46

Page 5/6

¶47

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶48

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

¶49

Jer

¶50

W.P.No.2978 of 2021

¶51

17.08.2023

¶52

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

¶53

Page 6/6

T.Senthilkumar v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Senthilkumar 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

C.Devendra Prasad Vs The Chief Engineer

M.Selvaraj Vs The Registrar

R.Bhuvaneswari Vs The Principal Secretary

Kanchana Devi Vs Government of Tamilnadu

R.Jagadeesan Vs The Chairman

M/s. The South Indian National Association Vs State of Tamil Nadu