Disposed¶32

K.Gunalan v. The District Collector

Madras HC6 Mar 2025WP(MD)/6018/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; encroachment on government land; public road; Sambanoor Kanmoi; Survey No.137; Keelakottai Village; Sivaganga District; District Collector; Tahsildar; order Na.Ka.E4/287/2024 dated 02.07.2024; representation dated 09.08.2024; time-bound direction (twelve weeks); hearing to parties; Article 226; W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; disposed of; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2024 by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 5 to 14, and to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶32

K.Gunalan Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the fourth respondent to implement the first respondent's order dated 02.07.2024 for removal of the alleged encroachment by respondents 5 to 14 on government land and road in Survey No.137, Keelakottai Village, Sivaganga District. +1 more

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim made either in the representation or in the supporting affidavit, and confining itself to the limited scope of the prayer, the Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2024.

¶32

Key takeaways

The consideration of the representation is to be carried out by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the private respondents 5 to 14, and appropriate orders are to be passed on merits and in accordance with law.ratio¶35
The exercise is to be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; no costs were imposed.ratio¶37
Considering the nature of the proposed order, notice to the private respondents 5 to 14 was dispensed with; by consent the petition was taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India — petitioner sought implementation of the first respondent's order in Na.Ka.E4/287/2024 dated 02.07.2024 for removal of the alleged encroachment by respondents 5 to 14 upon government land and a public road classified as Sambanoor Kanmoi in Survey No.137, Keelakottai Village, Sivaganga District, stated to be the only access road to the village crematorium. Counsel for the petitioner confined the request to time-bound consideration of the petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2024. By consent the petition was taken up for final disposal at admission, and notice to respondents 5 to 14 was dispensed with. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 09.08.2024 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 5 to 14, and to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 06.03.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025

K.Gunalan

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Sivagangai District.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate, Sivagangai District.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivaganga District.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Sivaganga.

¶14

5.Soman 6.Perumal

¶15

7.Sokkalingam

¶16

8.Sinnan 9.Kalaiyarasi 10.Karuppaiya 11.Suppaiya 12.Mandaiyan 13.Sevugan 14.Karuppaiya ...Respondents

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/5

¶18

PRAYER::Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025

¶20

PRAYER::Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the fourth respondent herein to implement the order in Na.Ka.E4/287/2024 dated 02.07.2024 passed by the first respondent herein to remove the illegal encroachment of government land and road in Survey No.137 of Keelakottai Village, Sivaganga District made by the respondents 5 to 14 herein.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.B.M.Subash For R1 to R4 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶22

ORDER

¶23

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

¶24

Heard Mr.B.M.Subash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

¶25

Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, learned Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 4. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the respondents 5 to 14 is dispensed with.

¶26

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

¶27

3.The contention of the petitioner is that there is a public road in Survey No.137, Keelakottai Village, which is classified as Sambanoor Kanmoi.

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025

¶30

The said road is the only access road to reach the crematorium allotted to the petitioner's village. The respondents 5 to 14 herein have encroached upon the said road and constructed their buildings. Seeking to remove the same, the petitioner has made representation before the first respondent, who in turn has passed an order directing the fourth respondent to conduct survey and take necessary action. Thereafter, no action has been taken. Therefore, the petitioner has again made representation to the respondents 1 to 4 in this regard. Since the same was not considered, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶31

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that though the petitioner has sought for a larger relief in this writ petition, he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the official respondents to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 09.08.2024, in accordance with law, within a time frame.

¶32

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 respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.08.2024 by giving

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.6018 of 2025

¶35

an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the respondents 5 to 14 and pass

¶36

appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of

¶37

twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶38

(J.N.B.,J.) (S.S.Y.,J.) 06.03.2025