Disposed

S.Nachimuthu v. The District Collector

Madras HC4 Dec 2024WP(MD)/29122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought cancellation of an assignment patta granted to the sixth respondent and removal of alleged encroachment by the seventh respondent. Authorities had not considered his representation dated 14.10.2024. The Court directed respondents 1 to 3 to consider it on merits within three months, without expressing views on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 1-3 to consider the representation dated 14.10.2024 and pass orders within three months.

S.Nachimuthu Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04.12.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶8

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶9

S.Nachimuthu : Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The District Collector,

¶12

Dindigul,

¶13

Dindigul District.

¶14

2.The Block Development Officer, Oddanchatram Panchayat Union,

¶15

Dindigul District.

¶16

3.The Tahsildar,

¶17

Oddanchatram Taluk,

¶18

Dindigul District.

¶19

4.The Village Administrative Officer, Veriyapoor Village,

¶20

Dindigul District.

¶21

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

¶22

1/7

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶24

5.The President,

¶25

Veriyapoor Panchayat, Dindigul District.

6.Elumalai

7.Saravanasamy

: Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to cancel the assignment patta made in favour of the 6^th respondent admeasuring 3 cents in S.No.744/25 and to remove the unauthorized construction put up by the 7^th respondent in the property in Survey No.744 admeasuring 20 cents by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 14.10.2024.

¶30

For Petitioner : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For Respondents 1 to 4 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶31

O R D E R ************ [ Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.]

¶32

By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken

¶33

up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶34

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

¶35

2/7

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶37

2. This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus to direct the official respondents to cancel the assignment patta made in favour of the 6^th respondent admeasuring 3 cents in S.No.744/25 and to remove the unauthorized construction put up by the 7^th respondent in the property in Survey No.744 admeasuring 20 cents by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 14.10.2024.

¶38

3. Since this Court is directing the official respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, after giving due opportunity to the private respondents herein, notice to the private respondents is hereby dispensed with.

¶39

4. The petitioner herein had given a representation to the official respondents on 14.10.2024, to cancel the assignment patta granted in favour of the 6^th respondent and to remove the encroachment alleged to have been made by the 7^th respondent. Since the said representation was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶40

3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶42

5. 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.

¶43

6. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.10.2024, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner herein and the respondents 6 & 7 herein, as well as all other persons, who may be interested in the subject property, within a period of three [3] months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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 respondents to consider the same on its own merits.

¶44

4/7

¶45

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

¶46

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶47

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

[M.S.R.,J.] & [A.D.M.C.,J.]

¶49

04.12.2024

¶50

Neutral Citation : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No MR

¶51

5/7

¶52

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

¶53

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶54

¶55

1.The District Collector, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

¶56

2.The Block Development Officer, Oddanchatram Panchayat Union, Dindigul District.

¶57

3.The Tahsildar, Oddanchatram Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶58

4.The Village Administrative Officer, Veriyapoor Village, Dindigul District.

¶59

5.The President,

¶60

Veriyapoor Panchayat,

¶61

Dindigul District.

¶62

6/7

¶63

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

¶64

W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶65

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

¶66

¶67

ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD)No.29122 of 2024

¶68

04.12.2024

¶69

7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.Nachimuthu v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Nachimuthu 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

L.Santiagu Vs The District Collector

Chelladurai. K Vs The Managing Director

The Director Of Elementary Education Vs B George

The Government of Tamil Nadu, Vs AnnathanaChathiram Sachidhanatham Swamy Madam

The Government of Tamil Nadu, Vs AnnathanaChathiram Sachidhanatham Swamy Madam

M.Malaipuliyan Vs The District Collector / Monitoring Committee