In this writ petition for an allotment of land or refund of deposit, the petitioner's counsel submitted a cancelled allotment notice from 2016 without having challenged it earlier. The Court found no merits in the petition filed in 2021 and dismissed it.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD) No.1058 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.1058 of 2021
Ramzan Jailani
...Petitioner
Vs.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2020 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.
1/4
W.P.(MD) No.1058 of 2021
For Petitioner :Mr.R.Mohamed Rajapdheen For Respondents :Mr.R.Sivakumar Standing Counsel
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the first and second respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 30.12.2020, wherein the petitioner has sought for allotment of the land or in alternate, for refund of the amount that is already paid to the tune of Rs.1,27,193/-.
2. Plot No.1187, LIG - II under Thoppur S&S Scheme was
allotted to the petitioner on 13.06.2008 under hire purchase basis. The petitioner was accepted to remit the costs after deducting the initial deposit with interest in equated monthly installments over a period of 15 years. This EMI was supposed to be paid on or before 15th of every month, commencing from the month of July, 2008.
3. The case of the petitioner is that she suffered various problems
in paying monthly installments and the petitioner wants the second respondent to consider the representation dated 30.12.2020 and to allot
2/4
W.P.(MD) No.1058 of 2021
the plot or in the alternative, to refund the initial deposit paid. Since the representation was not acted upon, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
4. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Housing Board circulated the proceedings of the Housing Board dated 06.09.2016, wherein the petitioner had already been informed that the allotment was cancelled in view of the fact that the petitioner did not pay EMI within the period stipulated. The petitioner has not challenged the proceedings and has filed this writ petition in the year 2021. Hence, this Court does not find
any merits in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
12.10.2023
NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No SM
3/4
W.P.(MD) No.1058 of 2021
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
SM
Order made in W.P(MD)No.1058 of 2021
Dated 12.10.2023
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding allotment of land or refund of deposit.
Ramzan Jailani
Superintendent Engineer, O/o. The Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board
Executive Engineer & Administrative Officer, Madurai Housing Unit, Tamil Nadu Housing Board
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
