Disposed

Nanthagopal.S.v v. The District Collector

Madras HC4 Jan 2023WP(MD)/109/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a mandate to close two coir units based on a petitioner's representation. The court, accepting that the representation needed consideration, directed the 2nd respondent to examine it within twelve weeks after providing a hearing opportunity, thereby disposing of the petition on admissions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks after providing a hearing.

Nanthagopal.S.v Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶8

W.P.(MD)No.109 of 2023 and W.M.P.(MD)No.121 of 2023

S.V.Nanthagopal

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The District Collector,

¶13

Collectorate Complex,

¶14

Madurai District, Madurai.

¶15

2.The District Environmental Engineer,

¶16

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,

¶17

Kappalur, Madurai-625 008.

¶18

3.The Assistant Executive Engineer,

¶19

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Mattaparai, Dindigul District.

¶20

Page 1 of 6

¶21

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

¶22

4.The Executive Officer, Vadipatti Town Panchayat, Madurai District.

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶24

5.Kavitha Senthilkumar

¶25

... Respondents

¶26

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary steps in accordance with law to close down two coir path manufacturing units belonging to the 5^th respondent functioning in S.F.Nos.436/1 and 438/1 situated at Mattaparai, Kulasekarankottai Revenue Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District based on the petitioner's representation dated 27.12.2022.

¶27

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugan For R1 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.Vijayakumar Natarajan Standing Counsel For R3 : Mr.S.Deendhayalan, Standing Counsel For R4 : Mr.K.Balasubramani, Special Government Pleader

¶28

Page 2 of 6

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶31

ORDER

¶32

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

¶33

This Writ Petition is filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary steps in accordance with law to close down two coir path manufacturing units belonging to the 5 th respondent functioning in S.F.Nos.436/1 and 438/1 situated at Mattaparai, Kulasekarankottai Revenue Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District based on the petitioner's representation dated 27.12.2022.

¶34

2.Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, learned Government Pleader takes notice for the 1^st respondent, Mr.Vijayakumar Natarajan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the 2^nd respondent, Mr.S.Deendhayalan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the 3^rd respondent and Mr.K.Balasubramani, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the 4 th respondent. Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed in this Writ Petition, notice to the 5 th respondent is dispensed with.

¶35

Page 3 of 6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶38

3.By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶39

4.Though the petitioner has raised several grounds in this Writ Petition, during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is suffice, if the representation of the petitioner dated 27.12.2022 is directed to be considered by the official respondents within a time frame.

¶40

5.The learned Government Pleader for the 1 st respondent, on instructions, submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 27.12.2022 would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed on merits and in accordance with law.

¶41

6.In view of the aforesaid submissions made on either side, without going into the merits of the case, we are inclined to direct the 2 nd respondent to

¶42

Page 4 of 6

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶45

consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.12.2022 and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, including the 5 th respondent. Such an exercise shall be completed as early as possible, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶46

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

¶47

[D.K.K., J.] & [R.V., J.] 04.01.2023

¶48

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

¶49

¶50

1.The District Collector, Collectorate Complex, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶51

Page 5 of 6

¶52

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

¶53

W.P.(MD) No.109 of 2023

¶54

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. AND

¶55

R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.

¶56

MYR

¶57

2.The Executive Officer, Vadipatti Town Panchayat, Madurai District.

¶58

W.P.(MD)No.109 of 2023

¶59

04.01.2023

¶60

Page 6 of 6

¶61

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

Nanthagopal.S.v v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanthagopal.S.v 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

Kalaivani.M Vs The Govt of Tamil Nadu

Vijayakumar. J (Ex-Army) Vs the Union of India

Ragunathan.S Vs The District collector

Udaiyar Koil Guna.T Vs The Regional Officer

Sunaichandran Vs The Authorized Officer

P.Silas Vijayakumar Vs The Union of India