Disposed

Narasimman.S v. the District Collector

Madras HC11 Dec 2024WP(MD)/12630/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the Revenue authorities to consider a pending representation on encroachment removal. The court granted liberty for a fresh representation and fixed a three-month deadline for action without deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty given to file a fresh representation; respondent directed to consider it on merits and pass an order within three months.

Narasimman.S Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 11.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD).No.10456 of 2021

S.Narasimman

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District,

¶12

Tirunelveli.

¶13

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶14

3.The Tahsildar, Manoor Taluk Office,

¶15

Manoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶16

4.The Managing Director, Welspun Renewable Energy Private Ltd., 7^th Floor, Welspun House, Kamala City, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400 013. ... Respondents

¶17

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to implement the order

¶18

Page 1 of 5

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶21

passed by the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings in O.Mu.A2/5970/2017 dated 13.11.2017 and proceedings in Pa.Mu.(A2)5386/2018 dated 26.09.2018 with regard to remove the encroachment made on the cart track by the 4^th respondent on the lands in Prancherry Village, Survey Nos.699/2, 752, 753/2 and 754/3 situated at Manoor Taluk, Tirunelveli District based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2019.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Gomathi Sankar For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.J.Ashok

¶23

Additional Government Pleader For R-4 : Mr.S.Karthik

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed for Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to implement the order passed by the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings in O.Mu.A2/5970/2017 dated 13.11.2017 and proceedings in Pa.Mu.(A2)5386/2018 dated 26.09.2018 with regard to removal of the encroachment made on the cart track by the 4^th respondent on the lands in Prancherry Village, Survey Nos.699/2, 752, 753/2 and 754/3 situated at Manoor Taluk, Tirunelveli District based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2019.

¶26

Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶28

The petitioner herein had given a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 on 24.09.2019 to remove the encroachments alleged to have been made by the fourth respondent in the subject lands. Since the said representation was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶29

It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶30

Since there is a considerable lapse of time after the earlier representation was made, the petitioner herein is granted liberty to give a fresh representation to the concerned respondent, ventilating his grievances, as expeditiously as possible. On receipt of such a representation, the concerned respondent is directed to consider the same, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the

¶31

Page 3 of 5

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶34

petitioner and the fourth respondent herein, as well as to any other person, who may be interested in the subject matter, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same, on its own merits.

¶35

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶36

(M.S.R.,J.) (A.D.M.C.,J.) 11.12.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm

¶37

To 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶38

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶39

3.The Tahsildar, Manoor Taluk Office, Manoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶40

Page 4 of 5

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶43

M.S.RAMESH,J. and A.D.MARIA CLETE,J.

¶44

¶45

W.P.(MD).No.12630 of 2021

¶46

11.12.2024

¶47

Page 5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Narasimman.S v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narasimman.S 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

The Government of Tamilnadu Vs Karthick.a

The District Educational Officer Vs L.Pushparaj

C.Jeyakumar Vs The District Collector

Rukkumani Vs The Corporation Commissioner

S.Solappan Vs S.Sundarraj

O.S.K.David, Vs the District Collector