Disposed

Sri Krishnan v. The District Collector

Madras HC6 Jan 2023WP(MD)/332/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to remove encroachments on a water body was disposed of at the admission stage. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file objections before administrative officers, referencing a prior order in a related petition, and dispensed with notice to the actual encroacher.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; liberty granted to petitioner to file objections before District Collector; no costs awarded.

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

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶7

W.P.(MD) No.332 of 2023

Sri Krishnan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶12

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirengam Revenue Division, Vannankovil, Trichy District.

¶13

3.The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk Office, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶14

4.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Marungapurai Panchayat Union, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶15

Page 1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

5.The President,

¶18

5.The President, Karadipatti Village Panchayat, Marungapurai Panchayat Union, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

6.Vijayakumar

7.Thangaraj

8.Balamani

... Respondents

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 to 5 respondents to remove the encroachment made by the 6 to 8 respondents in S.F.No.13/1 namely Chinnamankulam classified as water body situated at Karadipatti Village, Velukkurichi Revenue Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District on the basis of the petitioner's representations dated 11.10.2022 and 02.12.2022 within time frame fixed by this Honble Court.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vadivelan For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, Government Advocate for R1 to R3

¶26

Mr.K.Balasubramani, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R4 & R5

¶27

Page 2 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

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

¶32

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachments made by the respondents 6 to 8 in S.F.No.13/1, which was classified as water body, situated at Karadipatti Village, Velukkurichi Revenue Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, on the basis of the petitioner's representations dated 11.10.2022 and 02.12.2022, within a time frame.

¶33

2 . Heard Mr.T.Vadivelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.K.Balasubramani, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents 4 and 5. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this Writ Petition, notice to the respondents 6 to 8 is dispensed with.

¶34

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

¶35

_____________ Page 3 of 6_

¶36

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

¶37

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶39

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents 6 to 8 have made encroachments in S.F.No.13/1, situated at Karadipatti Village, Velukkurichi Revenue Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, which was classified as water body. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has made representations on 11.10.2022 and 02.12.2022. However, till date, no action was taken by the respondents to remove the aforesaid encroachments. Hence, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶40

5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that with regard to the same survey number, one encroacher, viz., Thangaraj, who is the 7^th respondent herein, has filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.27105 of 2022, challenging the proceedings of the fifth respondent therein, dated Nil.01.2022 and this Court, by order dated 01.12.2022, allowed the Writ Petition and remitted the matter back to the respondents 3 and 4 therein to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders, after affording a fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner herein, as well as the rival

¶41

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶44

claimants. Therefore, as per the direction of this Court, if the petitioner has any grievance, he can make his objections to the District Collector and the District

¶45

Revenue Officer, Trichy.

¶46

6. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to file his objections before the District Collector and the District Revenue Officer, Trichy, if he has any grievance, if so advised. No costs.

¶47

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

¶48

vsm

¶49

06.01.2023

¶50

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

¶51

¶52

1.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶53

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirengam Revenue Division, Vannankovil, Trichy District.

¶54

Page 5 of 6

¶55

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

¶56

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶57

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

¶58

vsm

¶59

3.The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk Office, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶60

4.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Marungapurai Panchayat Union, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶61

5.The President, Karadipatti Village Panchayat, Marungapurai Panchayat Union, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶62

W.P.(MD)No.332 of 2023

¶63

06.01.2023

¶64

Page 6 of 6

¶65

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

Sri Krishnan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Krishnan 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mathiyalagan Vs The District Collector

Angalaeswari.R Vs The District Collector

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

Ashwath Raja.P Vs The Commissioner

Suresh Kumar Vs The District Collector

Thirunavukarasu Vs The District Collector