← Library
Madras High CourtWP/9088/2014disposed of

S. Kalimuthu v. The District Collector

2016-07-27Honourable Mr Justice M. Jaichandren3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.07.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.9088 of 2014 S.Kalimuthu .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

2.The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk, 3.The Inspector of Police, Poonamallee Police Station, 4.Jeyakumar .. Respondents The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the second respondent Tahsildar, Poonamallee to implement the recommendations made by the third respondent Inspector of Police, Poonamallee, by his proceedings dated 22.11.2012, having reference Na.Ka.No.28/T-12 Poonamallee Ka.Ni/Pothu/2012 forthwith.

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.R.Ravichandran, AGP for RR1 to 3 - - - - -

ORDER

There is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to implement the recommendation made by the third respondent, by his proceedings, dated 22.11.2012.

It has been stated that the petitioner is a coolie, doing bronze welding works. The land, in which the petitioner is residing, had been purchased by him, by way of a sale deed, dated 02.11.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner had constructed a house in the said land and has been living in the said house. While so, the fourth respondent had illegally occupied the road area, leading to the house of the petitioner, by setting up a tea shop.

It has been further stated that, based on the complaint made by the petitioner, the third respondent has requested the Tahsildar, Poonamallee, the second respondent herein, to remove the tea shop, located in the poramboke land belonging to the Government, as it may cause law and order problems. Since the second respondent had not acted on the recommendation made by the third respondent, by his communication, dated 22.11.2012, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 had submitted that the second respondent would look into the recommendation made by the third respondent, by his communication, dated 22.11.

2012, and appropriate action would be taken, in due course, based on the recommendation of the third respondent, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as well as to the fourth respondent. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3, this Court is of the view that no further orders are necessary in the present writ petition. Hence the writ petition stands closed. No costs. vvk s/d- Assistant Registrar(CCC) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

2.The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk,

3.The Inspector of Police, Poonamallee Police Station, + 1 cc to Govt.Pleader SR 42904 sr(co) prk26/8 W.P.No.9088 of 2014