Disposed

Pandian v. The District Collector

Madras HC11 Jan 2023WP(MD)/686/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Common Order disposed of multiple writ petitions challenging eviction notices dated 23.12.2022. The Court directed that these notices be treated as show-cause notices and granted petitioners time to submit objections for the authorities to consider.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed; eviction notices treated as show cause; petitioners granted time to submit objections; respondent directed to pass orders in eight weeks.

Pandian Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 11.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶7

W.P.(MD)Nos.686 to 693 of 2023 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.683, 686, 684, 688, 691, 689, 687 and 685 of 2023

¶8

W.P.(MD)No.686 of 2023

¶9

Pandian ... Petitioner

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

1.The District Collector,

¶12

Ramanathapuram District,

¶13

Ramanathapuram.

¶14

2.The Divisional Engineer (Highways),

¶15

Construction and Maintenance,

¶16

Ramanathapuram District,

¶17

Ramanathapuram.

¶18

Page 1 of 6

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶21

3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways), Office of the Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance,

¶22

Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram District.

¶23

4.The Assistant Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Sayalkudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶24

5.The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents

¶25

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 3^rd respondent in his proceedings in Memo No.332/22/2022/A2, dated 23.12.2022 and quash the same as illegal.

¶26

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Malaiyendran For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, Government Advocate

¶27

Page 2 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶30

COMMON ORDER

¶31

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

¶32

The eviction notices dated 23.12.2022 issued by the 3 rd respondent,

¶33

directing the petitioners to remove the encroachment, is under challenge in these

¶34

Writ Petitions.

¶35

2.Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, learned Government Advocate takes notice for

¶36

the respondents .

¶37

3.By consent of both parties, these Writ Petitions are taken up for final

¶38

disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶39

4.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned eviction notices have been issued to the petitioners without issuing any show cause notice, enabling them to submit their respective objections / explanations. Therefore, the same are liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. He further submitted that the petitioners would be

¶40

Page 3 of 6

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶43

satisfied, if they are granted two weeks time to submit their respective explanations / objections and the same may be directed to be considered by the 3rd respondent within a time frame.

¶44

5.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners have been served with show cause notice on 12.12.2022 and thereafter, the impugned eviction notices have been issued on 23.12.2022. Therefore, the impugned eviction notices are perfectly valid and do not warrant any interference.

¶45

6.In view of the aforesaid submissions made on either side, we direct that the impugned eviction notices dated 23.12.2022 shall be treated as show cause notice. The petitioners are permitted to make their respective objections / explanations to the show cause notice, dated 23.12.2022, on or before 31.01.2023. On receipt of such objections / explanations, the 3 rd respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter. We make it

¶46

Page 4 of 6

¶47

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

¶48

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶49

clear that if there is any encroachment in the place in question, the same would be removed, after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and by following due process of law.

¶50

7.With the above direction, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No

¶51

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶52

[D.K.K., J.] & [R.V., J.] 11.01.2023

¶53

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

¶54

MYR

¶55

Note: Issue Order copy on 12.01.2023.

¶56

¶57

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶58

Page 5 of 6

¶59

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

¶60

W.P.(MD) Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶61

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.

¶62

AND

¶63

R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.

¶64

MYR

¶65

2.The Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶66

3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways), Office of the Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram District.

¶67

4.The Assistant Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Sayalkudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶68

5.The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶69

W.P.(MD)Nos.686 to 693 of 2023

¶70

11.01.2023

¶71

Page 6 of 6

¶72

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

Pandian v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandian 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

Johnsirajam.C Vs The District Collector cum Inspector of Panchayat

Lenin.M Vs The Authorised Officer

Veeramani Vs The District Collector

Sevugaperumal.G Vs The Tahsildar

Muthukrishnan. M Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Murugan.M Vs The District collector