← Library
Madras High CourtWP/115/2018disposed of

B.Shanthi v. The Managing Director

2018-01-05Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.01.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition No.115 of 2018 and WMP.No.161 of 2018 B.Shanthi D/o.Balu .. Petitioner versus 1.The Managing Director No.5, Kamarajar Salai Triplicane, Chennai-600 005.

2.The Chairman No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Triplicane, Chennai-600 005.

3.The Executive Engineer Division-5, Teynampet, Chennai.

4.B.Pitchai Ammal .. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.12.2017 and to allot a tenement in favour of the petitioner in Nochikuppam, TNSCB Quarters, Chennai as per the order dated 17.09.2014 of the respondent board. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sivakumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajasekar standing counsel for R1 to R3

O R D E R

Mr.M.Rajasekar, learned standing counsel takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3. Since this writ petition is being disposed of without affecting the interest of the fourth

respondent, notice to her is dispensed with.

2. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider her representation dated 09.12.2017, wherein and whereby she sought for allotment of tenement in Nochikuppam, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board Quarters, Chennai, as per the order dated 17.09.2014 issued by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board.

3. It is stated that the fourth respondent, who is the mother of the petitioner deserted the family 35 years back. Her father also expired on 27.03.2016.

Since the official respondents are going to allot tenement to the eligible persons, the petitioner made an application for allotment of such tenement. However, it is stated that the fourth respondent made an objection not to allot new tenement to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court and filed the present writ petition.

4. Considering the above stated facts and circumstances, without expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, I only direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.12.2017 and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent. Such exercise shall be done by the respondents 1 to 3 within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mk To, 1.The Managing Director No.5, Kamarajar Salai Triplicane, Chennai-600 005.

2.The Chairman No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Triplicane, Chennai-600 005.

3.The Executive Engineer Division-5, Teynampet, Chennai.

+1cc to Mr.M.Sivakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.796 +1cc to Mr.M.RajaSekar, Advocate, S.R.No.786 W.P.No.115 of 2018 RRK(11/01/2018)