Arumugam v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.03.2024 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Arumugam ..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Collectorate Building

2. The District Revenue Officer Ranipet District

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer RDO Office Building Ranipattai Revenue Division

4. The Tahsildar

5. The Block Development Officer Walajapet Panchayat Union

6. The Vannivedu Village Panchayat Vannivedu Village, Walaja Taluk Ranipet District.

7. The Secretary Veera Saiva Ligayath Kannadiyar Samudayam Rep. by K.G.Kumar Anadalai Village and Post ..

Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 6 to prevent the 7th respondent community people from using the land in S.No.707/1B Vannivedu Village, Walaja Town, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District and direct the 7th respondent to use the gave yard S.No.261 and S.No.412 Vanivedu Village, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District. For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Mannarsamy For the Respondents : Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate for R5

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.S.Mannarsamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar, learned State Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.P.Harish, learned Government Advocate for

respondent 5.

2. Grievance is made that the land in S.No.707/1B should not be used as a burial ground. No documents are placed on record to show the classification of the said land.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an application is given under the Right to Information Act, 2005, but the information is not received.

4. In fact, it is not a public interest litigation. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is doing business in the said industrial area. He is personally aggrieved. The petition could not have been a public interest litigation. Moreover, there is no authentic information placed on record. The petitioner has approached the authority concerned. The concerned authority shall consider the representation filed by the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with the law and policy preferably within a period of nine months.

5. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 25.03.2024 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No drm To

1. The District Collector Collectorate Building

2. The District Revenue Officer Ranipet District

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer RDO Office Building Ranipattai Revenue Division

4. The Tahsildar

5. The Block Development Officer Walajapet Panchayat Union

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

(drm) 25.03.2024