Jaffe Ali v. The Assistant Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2019

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.37071 of 2006 And M.P.No.2 of 2006 A.Jaffer Ali ... Petitioner Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms, Erode.

... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent relating to notice in M.R.No.4/571/17-70/C2 dated 18.7.2006, quash the same in so far as it relates to the land in S.No.344 (Old S.No.248/Part) in Servaikarampalayam Village of an extent of 1.37 Acres and consequently forbear the respondent from assigning the said land to any person.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thamaraiselvan For Respondent : Mr.M.Elumalai, Government Advocate.

O R D E R

The internal communication sent by the Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms, Erode to six officials, including the District Collector, Coimbatore District, in proceedings dated 18.7.2006, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The impugned communication dated 18.7.2006 simply states that the 'B' Memo enclosed along with the circular is to be affixed in the Notice Board of the Office of all six Officers and a report is to be submitted to the Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms, Erode immediately. In other words, the Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms, Erode, directed the six officials to affix the 'B' Memo in the Notice Board of their respective Offices and send the report. Such a communication would not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

constitute any cause of action for the purpose of filing of the present writ petition. Only in the event of passing any order, affecting the rights of the writ petitioner, the writ petitioner would be in a position to redress his grievance in the manner known to law.

3. On a perusal of the order impugned, this Court is of an undoubted opinion that the writ petitioner has not made out any cause for the purpose of entertaining the present writ petition and it is left open to the writ petitioner to redress his grievances, if any exists in the manner known to law.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Svn To The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms, Erode.

+1cc to Mr.R.Thamarai Selvan, Advocate, S.R.No.8277 WP No.37071 of 2006 GJ(CO) GSP(06/02/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/