Mrs. S.Pushpa v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.03.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.6944 of 2020 S.Pushpa ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

2. The Tahsildar, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the petitioner property, being land and shop, situated at Pethikuppan Village, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District without following due process of law and consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2020. For Petitioners : Mr. R.Suresh Kumar For Respondent : Mr. Annai Ezhil Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the property where the petitioner is claiming to be running a shop selling Aavin products.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the said property belongs to her father in law and that the General Manager, The Kancheepuram-Thiruvallur District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd., Aavin has given permission to the petitioner to put up a bunk shop and sell the Aavin products till the year 2021.

The further case of the petitioner is that some unknown persons have threatened the petitioner and were demanding for ransom. Therefore, the petitioner has given representation to the respondents seeking for action. Since the same was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed before this Court.

3. Heard Mr. R.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Annai Ezhil, leaned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the first respondent.

4. A reading of the representation dated 24.02.2020, clearly shows that some unknown persons have barged into the shop of the petitioner and threatened her and demanded for money. It is further stated in the representation that the petitioner will be thrown out of the shop if she does not pay the money.

5. The nature of allegations made in the representation will only need a Police complaint and it is not known as to why the petitioner has chosen to give representation to the Revenue Officials and the District Collector. It is curious to note that the petitioner has claimed a relief in this Writ Petition to direct the respondents not to dispossess her from the property.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made certain statements which was running contrary to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. This Court cannot take into consideration those statements without corresponding pleadings in the affidavit. If the petitioner is threatened by any rowdy elements, the petitioner will have to necessarily approach the jurisdiction Police and a complaint cannot be given to the respondents.

7. This Court does not find any merits in the Writ Petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD I) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar bkn

To

1. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

2. The Tahsildar, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District.

+1cc to Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.24213 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.24492 W.P.No.6944 of 2020 BR(CO) KKV/09/07/2020