B.Parvathy Bose v. The Managing Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.02.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM B.Parvathy Bose ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Managing Director,

2. The Executive Engineer,

3. The Additional Executive Engineer, ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2021 sent to the respondents requesting allotment of residential flat to the petitioner under the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board Scheme.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Saravanakumar

For Respondents : Mr.B.Balaji, Standing Counsel for TNUHDB

O R D E R

The Writ of Mandamus is filed to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 05.02.2021 for allotment of residential flat under the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board Scheme.

2. The petitioner states that a large number of encroachers were in occupation of Kakkangi Nagar, New Avadi Salai, Chennai. The Slum Clearance Board proposed to construct a new scheme for the purpose of providing tenements to these encroachers. Accordingly, the encroachers were identified and alternate plots were allotted to them. During the course of identification, the authorities have collected the details and documents of the encroachers and biometric list was also published by the competent authorities. Enumeration was done based on the documents and evidences available on record. Accordingly, all the tenements were provided alternate flats under the Slum Clearance Board Scheme and the encroachers were removed. Though the petitioner claims that she was also residing in the Kakkangi Nagar, her name was not found in the eligible list of persons and more so in the biometric list. The petitioner could not able to establish any other irregularity in the biometric

list or in the list published by the respondents.

3. That being so, the relief, as such sought for in the present Writ Petition cannot be granted. Mere direction to dispose of the representation cannot be considered in this case, since the petitioner has not established any right to seek allotment.

4. With these observations, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

06.02.2024 skr Index : Yes Speaking order To

1. The Managing Director,

2. The Executive Engineer,

3. The Additional Executive Engineer,

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

skr 06.02.2024