Allowed

R. Palaniammal, v. the District Collector

Madras HC22 Sept 2023WP(MD)/21046/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ to restrain a Village Panchayat from constructing a building on land used as a school playground, alleging misuse of public land. The court noted the land is classified as Rayathu Punjai and granted the writ to prohibit further construction while allowing the existing completed structure to remain.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's writ petition allowed; direction issued to respondents to prevent further construction; no order as to costs.

R. Palaniammal, Vs the District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014

R.Palaniammal

... Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Thirumangalam Taluk Office, Madurai District.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Kallikudi Village Panchayat Union, Kallikudi, Madurai District.

¶13

4.The President,

¶14

Sivarakkottai Village Panchayat, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014

¶20

take immediate action on the on going construction activity of a building made by the fourth respondent herein on the school play ground place comprised in Survey No. 215/1, Sivarakottai Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai Dsitrict on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner dated 11.12.2014 forthwith.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar For Respondents : Mr.S.RA.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Heard both sides.

¶24

The petitioner is a former President of the local body. According to her, Survey No.215/1 Sivarakottai must be used as playground for the welfare of the children studying in a Government School. Her grievance is that the President who was holding the office in the year 2014 proposed to construct a Government building in the said survey number. To restrain the fourth respondent from doing so, the present writ petition came to be filed.

¶25

During the pendency of the writ petition the construction had already been completed. The question of directing its demolition does not and cannot arise. However, to satisfy myself I called upon the learned Additional

¶26

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

¶27

2/4

¶28

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014

¶29

Government Pleader to produce the A-register. It clearly mentions that the survey No.215/1 has been classified as “Rayathu Punjai”. I fail to understand as to how it can become sarkar poramboke. The names of three temples along

¶30

with a well have been mentioned in Column No.12. The Panchayat Union road also passes through the said survey number. In these circumstances, while the construction that has already come up may remain, no further construction shall be put up.

¶31

This writ petition is allowed on these terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

22.09.2023

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶36

2.The Tahsildar, Thirumangalam Taluk Office, Madurai District.

¶37

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

¶38

3/4

¶39

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014

¶40

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶41

MGA

¶42

3.The Block Development Officer, Kallikudi Village Panchayat Union, Kallikudi, Madurai District.

¶43

4.The President, Sivarakkottai Village Panchayat, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District.

¶44

W.P(MD)No.21046 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014

¶45

22.09.2023

¶46

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

¶47

4/4

R. Palaniammal, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Palaniammal, 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

P.B.Balasubramaniam Vs The Secretary

Swamiji, Vs the Chief Secretary

M. Gobinathan, Vs the National Highways

Chinnamuthu @ R. Muthu, (Died) Vs the District Collector

M/S.Kasiyananatha Cooking Vs Tamilnadu Small Industries

M/S. Sri. Paulthai Lorry Vs the General Manager