← Library
Madras High CourtWP/568/2014dismissed

Gopal v. State

2016-07-01Honourable Mr Justice M. Jaichandren2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.07.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.568 of 2014 Gopal .. Petitioner Vs.

1.State, represented by Tahsildar, Officer of Taluk, Thirukazhikundram, Kancheepuram District.

2.The Head Surveyor, Thirukazhikundram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

.. 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 herein to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.12.2013 and to measure the property situated at S.No.59.5C to an extent of 0.50 cents at Mangalam Village, Vadakupattu, Thirukazhikundram, Kancheepuram District and lay a new boundary stone in the land. For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.P.Karthikeyan, GA - - - - -

ORDER

When the matter is called today, there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying that this court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.12.2013, and to measure the property situated in S.No.59/5C, having an extent of 0.50 cents, at Mangalam village, Vadakupattu, Thirukazhikundram, Kancheepuram District, and to lay the boundary stones in respect of the said property.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the property situated in S.No.59/5C, in Mangalam village, Vadakupattu, Thirukazhikundram, Kancheepuram District, had already been measured and boundary stones had also been laid. Hence, the writ petition has become infructuous. The learned counsel had also placed a communication issued to that effect, by the first respondent, dated 6.2.2014. In view of the said submissions made by the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents and in view of the communication of the first respondent, dated 6.2.2014, this court is of the considered view that the writ petition has become infructous. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, as infructuous. No costs.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar vvk To 1.The Tahsildar, Officer of Taluk, Thirukazhikundram, Kancheepuram District.

2.The Head Surveyor, Thirukazhikundram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

+1 cc to Government Pleader sr.37442 W.P.No.568 of 2014 aa18/07/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/