Dismissed

Vaithilingam v. the District Collector

Madras HC8 Aug 2024WP/17907/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the 3rd Respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.05.2022 regarding land encroachment by the 5th Respondent and pass appropriate orders within six weeks after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 3rd Respondent to consider representation dated 31.05.2022 and pass appropriate orders within six weeks after hearing.

Vaithilingam Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 08.08.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.D.KRISHNAKUMAR ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

¶7

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

Vaithilingam

... Petitioner

-vs-

The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Salem District.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. Revenue Divisional Office, Mettur Dam-1, Mettur, Salem District.

¶13

The Thasildhar, O/o. Thasildhar Office, Mettur Dam-1, Mettur, Salem District.

¶14

The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Mariyamman Temple, Konoor Village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

¶15

Sembu

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachment in

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

¶21

S.No.677/1, Mariyamman Thirukovil, Konoor East Village, Konoor, Mettur Taluk,

¶22

Salem District in pursuant to the representation dated 31.05.2022.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthamizhselvakumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman Govt. Advocate *****

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

(By the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)

¶26

This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to

¶27

remove the encroachment in S.No.677/1, Mariyamman Thirukovil, Konoor East Village, Konoor, Mettur Taluk, Salem District in pursuant to the representation dated 31.05.2022.

¶28

It is the case of the petitioner that the Temple situated in S.No.677/1 is being managed and regulated by the HR&CE Department and in the Temple, the devotees of Mariyamman used to assemble and celebrate the Temple Festival. While so, the 5^th respondent encroached upoon the land belonging to the Temple by putting a Track in order to have an access to his property, which causes hindrance to the public at larg. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though he had made a representation dated 31.05.2022 to the respondents for removal of the encroachment, there is no action taken against the 5^th respondent. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

2/4

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

¶32

Learned Government Advocate appearing for R1 to R3 stated that the

¶33

third respondent is the competent authority to look into the issue and a reasonable time may be granted to the 3^rd respondent for considering and passing appropriate orders on

¶34

the representation of the petitioner.

¶35

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account the limited scope of the relief sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directs the 3^rd respondent to consider the representation dated 31.05.2022 of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, R5 and other interested parties, if any.

¶36

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

¶37

Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order ar

¶38

3/4

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

¶41

HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, AND P.B.BALAJI,J.,

¶42

¶43

To:

¶44

The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Salem District.

¶45

The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. Revenue Divisional Office, Mettur Dam-1, Mettur, Salem District.

¶46

The Thasildhar, O/o. Thasildhar Office, Mettur Dam-1, Mettur, Salem District.

¶47

W.P.No.17907 of 2024

¶48

08.08.2024

¶49

4/4

¶50

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

Vaithilingam v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaithilingam 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

S.Sathish Narayanan Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

V.Nandagopalan Vs the Under Secretary

Minor Jeeva Rithwik S Vs the Sub Collector/Sub Divisional Magistrate

Lion. G.Devarajan Vs The District Collector

Managing Director Vs R.Balakrishnan

V.Kumar Vs Greater Chennai Corporation