Disposed

Mathiyalagan v. The District Collector

Madras HC5 Jan 2023WP(MD)/214/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking issuance of Mandamus to remove encroachments on government lands, village ponds, and water channels by unidentified parties. Court directed authorities to consider the representation, issue notices, and pass orders on merits after due process within 12 weeks. Petition dismissed as so disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directions to authorities to consider the representation, issue notices to encroachers, provide opportunity of hearing, and remove encroachments within 12 weeks.

Mathiyalagan Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

Mathiyalagan

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Thiruvarankulam Panchayat Union, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶13

4.Siddar 5.Guanasekaran 6.Rengadurai 7.Nagan 8.Nadarajan 9.Govindasamy 10.Manickam 11.Chellakannu 12.Perumal 13.Kulanthaivel

¶14

1/7

¶15

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

¶16

14.Muniyan

¶17

14.Muniyan 15.Balasubramanian 16.Selvarasu 17.Anandhan 18.Nadarajan 19.Ravichandran 20.Gunasekaran 21.Siddar 22.Dhanuskodi 23.Mathiyalagan 24.Govindan 25.Krishnan 26.Dhanuskodi 27.Ivaran 28.Durairaj 29.Ramukannu 30.Shanthi 31.Reneswari 32.Meyyappan 33.Duraisamy 34.Murugesan 35.Ramamoorthi 36.Thatchinamoorthi 37.Pannerselvam 38.Mariappan 39.Selvaraj 40.Karuppaiah 41.Ganesan 42.Rengasamy 43.Narayanan 44.Ramamoorthi 45.Appadurai 46.Subramanian 47.Annadurai 48.Rengadurai 49.Subramanian 50.Selvarasu 51.Gunasekaran 52.Siddar

¶18

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶19

2/7

¶20

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

¶21

53.Ravichandran 54.Thirupathi 55.Vellaisamy 56.Muthuvel 57.Mari 58.Arami 59.Ganapathi 60.Paramasivam 61.Ramamoorthi 62.Narayanan 63.Arangan 64.Manickam 65.Mariappan 66.Ganesan 67.Arungulavan 68.Ganesan 69.Annasamy 70.Arulselvam 71.Manickam 72.Govindasamy 73.Seethai 74.Selvaraj

¶22

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶23

... Respondents

¶24

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachment made by the respondents 4 to 74 in Survey Nos.33/33, 90/90, 129/29, 168/11, 251/251, 258/2, 276/276, 289/289, 345/2, 47/2, 184/24, 441/6, 444/4, 433/7 and 109/2 at Pallathividuthi Village, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 05.12.2022.

¶25

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

¶26

3/7

¶27

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Rameshkumar

¶29

For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶30

ORDER

¶31

(Order of the Court was made by D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)

¶32

The prayer in this Writ Petition is seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachment made by the respondents 4 to 74 in Survey Nos.33/33, 90/90, 129/29, 168/11, 251/251, 258/2, 276/276, 289/289, 345/2, 47/2, 184/24, 441/6, 444/4, 433/7 and 109/2 at Pallathividuthi Village, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 05.12.2022.

¶33

According to the petitioner, he is a resident of Pallathividuthi Village and there are lot of encroachments made by the respondents 4 to 74 in Village Pond, water channels, roads, Temple lands, water bodies and other Government lands. Hence, the petitioner made a representation,

¶34

4/7

¶35

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

¶36

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶37

dated 05.12.2022 to the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments made in the abovesaid survey numbers. Since the same has not been considered so far, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶38

The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, on instructions, submitted that the representation of the petitioner, dated 05.12.2022 would be considered and appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law.

¶39

In view of the abovesaid submission, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, the authorities concerned are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 05.12.2022 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law. If there is any encroachment as claimed by the petitioner, after issuing notice to all other parties including the respondents 4 to 74, the respondents 2 and 3 shall take necessary action for removal of the encroachment, after affording sufficient opportunity of personal hearing to all the parties concerned and by following due process of law, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

5/7

¶41

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

¶42

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶43

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶44

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps

¶45

[D.K.K.,J.] [R.V.,J.] 05.01.2023

¶46

¶47

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶48

2.The Tahsildar, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶49

3.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Thiruvarankulam Panchayat Union, Alangudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶50

6/7

¶51

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

¶52

W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶53

D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J. and R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

¶54

¶55

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.214 of 2023

¶56

DATED : 05.01.2023

¶57

7/7

¶58

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

Mathiyalagan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathiyalagan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nanthagopal.S.v Vs The District Collector

Udaiyar Koil Guna.T Vs The Regional Officer

Sunaichandran Vs The Authorized Officer

Angalaeswari.R Vs The District Collector

M/s.Ksm Leather Exports Vs The Authorized Officer / Assistant General Manager

Nagarajan.M Vs The Authorized Officer