Allowed

Petchimuthu. S v. The District Collector

Madras HC25 Jan 2023WP(MD)/1048/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an eviction notice dated 21.10.2022 issued by the Municipality. Petitioners ran saloon shops on a water body for over 50 years and admitted this fact. They prayed for alternative accommodation instead of eviction.

What did the court decide?

Directions to provide alternative place within three months; stay on coercive steps; petitioners to vacate old premises upon receipt of new place.

Petchimuthu. S Vs The District Collector — Partition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶7

W.P.(MD)No.1048 of 2023 and W.M.P.(MD)No.988 of 2023

¶8

1.S.Petchimuthu

¶9

2.Madasamy

¶10

3.Sadaiyappan

¶11

4.P.Subburaj

¶12

5.Sundar

¶13

6.S.Ganapathi

¶14

7.Arumugasamy

¶15

8.P.Kumaresan

¶16

9.S.Velmurugan

¶17

10.Mariappan

¶18

11.Sundar

¶19

12.Muthuraj

¶20

13.Muthuselvan

¶21

Page 1 of 6

¶22

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

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶24

14.Kurusamy 15.Sakthivel

¶25

16.Madasamy 17.Murugesan

¶26

... Petitioners

¶27

-Vs-

¶28

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

¶29

2.The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union Office, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶30

3.The Panchayat President, Vadakkupudhur Panchayat Office, Vadakkupudhur, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶31

4.The Commissioner, Sankarankovil Municipality, Tenkasi District.

¶32

... Respondents

¶33

Page 2 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶36

PRAYER:

¶37

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 4^th respondent vide order Na.Ka.No.2313/2022/F1, dated 21.10.2022 and to quash the same with regard to 17 saloon shops of the petitioners and consequently, direct the 4^th respondent to give alternative place for 17 saloon shops of the petitioners in Old S.No.368/2, Ward A, Block 19, T.S.No.8, situated at Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶38

For Petitioners : Mrs.Ragavendree, For Mr.S.Suresh Manickam For R1 & R4 : Mr.V.Nirmal Kumar, Government Advocate For R2 & R3 : Mr.K.Balasubramani, Special Government Pleader

¶39

ORDER

¶40

[Order of the Court was made by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.]

¶41

Challenging the eviction notice dated 21.10.2022 issued by the 4^th respondent , this Writ Petition is filed with a consequential direction to the 4 th respondent to give alternative place for 17 saloon shops of the petitioners in Old S.No.368/2, Ward A, Block 19, T.S.No.8, situated at Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶42

Page 3 of 6

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶45

2.According to the petitioners, they are running saloon shops in the land in question for more than 50 years and fairly, admitted that the land in question is a water body. Therefore, they seek only alternative place to run their business and to that extent, they also filed an undertaking affidavit before this Court.

¶46

3.The learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 4 has produced the proceedings of the 4 th respondent dated 24.01.2023 addressed to him and submitted that the 4 th respondent will consider the request of the petitioners and provide alternative place to the petitioners in different localities, as there is paucity of place for giving shops to all these petitioners on the same locality.

¶47

4.In the light of the aforesaid submission, this Court directs the 4 th respondent to provide alternative place to these petitioners as per his proceedings dated 24.01.2023 and the petitioners are also directed to vacate the

¶48

Page 4 of 6

¶49

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

¶50

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶51

shops occupied by them and hand over the possession to the 4 th respondent Municipality. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the 4 th respondent shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioners. We make it clear that this order will apply only to these petitioners.

¶52

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶53

[D.K.K., J.] & [R.V., J.] 25.01.2023 (2/2)

¶54

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶55

MYR

¶56

¶57

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

¶58

Page 5 of 6

¶59

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

¶60

W.P.(MD) No.1048 of 2023

¶61

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. AND

¶62

R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.

¶63

MYR

¶64

2.The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union Office, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶65

3.The Panchayat President, Vadakkupudhur Panchayat Office, Vadakkupudhur, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

¶66

4.The Commissioner, Sankarankovil Municipality, Tenkasi District.

¶67

W.P.(MD)No.1048 of 2023

25.01.2023

(2/2)

Page 6 of 6

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

Petchimuthu. S v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Petchimuthu. S 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

Ramesh.M Vs The District Collector

Sulochana Ammal Vs the Tahsildar

Priyadharshni.R Vs The Thasildar

Irulappan.I @ Pitchai Vs The District Collector

Kumaresan Vs The District Collector

Purushothaman K Vs The Authorized Officer