Disposed

Lingadurai, v. the District Collector

Madras HC26 Jul 2024WP(MD)/22493/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the District Collector to consider a representation regarding unauthorized church construction and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks after providing an opportunity to parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.06.2018 and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks of receipt of this order.

Lingadurai, Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.07.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.D.KRISHNAKUMAR, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶8

W.P.(MD)No.22493 of 2018

Lingadurai

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶13

2.The Block Development Officer (Panchayat), Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶14

3.The Tahsildar,

¶15

Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶16

4.The Special Officer, Kannanallur Panchayat, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶17

5.Selvam Jeyaraj

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the unauthorized construction put up by the 5^th respondent in Survey No.426/2J of Thangaiyam, Kannanallur Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶20

Page 1 of 5

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2018

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sasi Kumar For R1 to R4 : Mr.P.Thilakkumar, Government Pleader For R5 : Mr.J.Aswin Abisha

¶24

ORDER

¶25

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble The ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶26

According to the petitioner, the 5^th respondent, without obtaining any building approval, put up a church in Survey No.426/2J, where he is conducting religious functions by playing Christianity songs and prasangam loudly, while conducting Brahma Sakthi Amman Kovil Poojai. Therefore, pointing out the unauthorized construction, the petitioner made a representation dated 22.06.2018 to the 1^st respondent. However, no action has been taken. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶27

2.The learned Government Pleader for the official respondents would

¶28

submit that the representation of the petitioner would be considered on merits and appropriate orders would be passed within the stipulated time to be fixed by this Court.

¶29

Page 2 of 5

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2018

¶32

3.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the writ

¶33

petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, we are inclined to direct the

¶34

1^st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.06.2018 and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, after providing opportunity to all the parties concerned, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

4.It is needless to state that the petitioner shall submit a copy of his representation dated 22.06.2018 once again to the 1^st respondent along with a copy of this order, enabling the 1^st respondent to comply with the order of this Court within the stipulated time.

¶36

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No

¶37

costs.

¶38

[D.K.K., A.C.J.] & [R.V., J.] 26.07.2024

¶39

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

¶40

Yuva

¶41

Page 3 of 5

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2018

¶44

¶45

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶46

2.The Block Development Officer (Panchayat), Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶47

3.The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶48

4.The Special Officer, Kannanallur Panchayat, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶49

Page 4 of 5

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2018

¶52

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, A.C.J.

¶53

AND R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.

¶54

Yuva

¶55

W.P.(MD)No.22493 of 2018

¶56

26.07.2024

¶57

Page 5 of 5

¶58

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

Lingadurai, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lingadurai, 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

Selvakumar C Vs The State Government

Rukmani Vs The District Collector

M.Saravanakumar Vs The Commmissionerate of Prohibition and Excise Department

A.M.Sundaravel Party in Person Vs the Chief Secretary

A.M.Sundaravel, Vs the Chief Secretary to

Muthuramalingam S Vs The District Collector / Monitoring Committee