Disposed¶34

Mahavishnu v. The District Collector

Madras HC23 Apr 2025WP(MD)/11617/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; Article 226; encroachment removal; representation dated 27.08.2024 not considered; representations dated 20.01.2025 and 03.03.2025; memorandum O.Mu.2895771/2025/A1 dated 29.01.2025; Survey Nos. 99/7A3 and 99/7B4; Vittamapatti Village; Viralimalai Taluk; Pudukkottai District; District Collector Dindigul; Revenue Divisional Officer Palani; Tashildar Oddanchathiram; fourth respondent Kowsalya; notice dispensed with; twelve weeks timeline; disposal at admission stage by consent; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.08.2024 after hearing the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve [12] weeks; no costs. ¶34

Mahavishnu Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the second respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's unactioned representation dated 27.08.2024 seeking removal of encroachment in the petition-mentioned property. +1 more

¶27

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.08.2024 after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

The second respondent must pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve [12] weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs.

¶34

Key takeaways

Considering the nature of the order proposed, notice to the fourth respondent was dispensed with.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Mandamus) under Article 226 disposed of at the admission stage, by consent and without expressing any opinion on merits, by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (J. Nisha Banu, J.) on 23.04.2025. The petitioner's grievance was non-consideration of his representation dated 27.08.2024 seeking removal of encroachment said to have been made in Survey Nos. 99/7A3 and 99/7B4, Vittamapatti Village, Viralimalai Taluk, Pudukkottai District, pursuant to the second respondent's memorandum in O.Mu.2895771/2025/A1 dated 29.01.2025. The Court directed the second respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani) to consider the representation dated 27.08.2024 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent (Kowsalya), and to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve [12] weeks. Notice to the fourth respondent was dispensed with considering the nature of the proposed order. No costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11617 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23.04.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶7

W.P.(MD)No.11617 of 2025

Mahavishnu

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Dindigul District.

¶12

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District.

¶13

3.The Tashildar, Oddanchathiram, Dindigul District.

¶14

4.Kowsalya

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to remove the encroachment made the 5th respondent in Survey Nos. 99/7A3 and 99/7B4 situated at Vittamapatti Village, Viralimalai Taluk, Pudukkottai District by implementing the memorandum of the 2nd respondent in O.Mu.

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.11617 of 2025

¶20

2895771/2025/A1 dated 29.01.2025 by considering the representations of the petitioner dated 20.01.2025 and 03.03.2025.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Karthik For R1 to R3 : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.)

¶24

Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia, learned Special Government Pleader takes

¶25

notice for the respondents 1 to 3. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.

¶26

2.By consent, this writ petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶27

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that his representation dated 27.08.2024 seeking to remove the encroachment made in the petition mentioned

¶28

property have not been considered so far. Therefore, he has filed this Writ Petition.

¶29

4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the representation of the petitioner would be considered

¶30

2/4

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.11617 of 2025

¶33

and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law within a period that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶34

5.Co nsidering the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner either in the representation or in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.08.2024 by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶35

(J.N.B.,J.) (S.S.Y.,J.) 23.04.2025

¶36

Index:Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ta To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Dindigul District.

¶37