P.Seenivasan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.04.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Writ Petition No.13024 of 2023 P.Seenivasan ..
Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector District Collector Office Salem 636 001.
2. The Commissioner Panchayat Union Office Kadaiyampatti Panchayat Union Kadaiyampatti Salem 636 351.
3. M.Madhayan ..
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 26.03.2022, 26.04.2022 and 24.03.2023 to make basic amenities in Karuvalli weekly market, Karuvalli Panchayat, Kadaiyampatti Taluk, Salem District, to stop the
multiple illegal collections of fee beyond the prescribed fee as per the tender guidelines from the farmers and issue receipts for the fees collected and run the weekly market in a fair manner and to remove the illegally constructed buildings in the market, to determine the border of the market to collect the fee and safeguard the livelihood of farmers.
For the Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for Respondents 1 and 2
ORDER
(Made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) The petitioner, aggrieved by the collection of huge entry fees by the third respondent contractor in Karuvalli weekly market, Karuvalli Panchayat, Kadaiyampatti Taluk, Salem District, has come up with this writ petition.
2. The petitioner has made representations on 26.03.2022, 26.04.2022 and 24.03.2023 to the respondents 1 and 2 setting out the irregularities that are taking place in the Karuvalli weekly market, by the third respondent, including non issuance of receipt for the entry
fee collected by the third respondent, irrespective of the quantity of vegetables or load of the lorry. As the representations did not evoke any response, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.
3. For the query raised under RTI Act as to whether the third respondent has been directed to issue any receipt for the entry fee, it was stated that the contractor is solely responsible for issuing receipts.
4. Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader, taking notice for the respondents 1 and 2, submitted that the petitioner's representations have not been supported with any document to substantiate his allegations.
5. In view of the above and considering the facts of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 26.03.2022, 26.04.2022 and 24.03.2023 and take appropriate action within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, on merits and in accordance with law. In the meanwhile, the respondents
1 and 2 are directed to ensure that the third respondent is collecting only reasonable entry fee and issuing receipt for the same. There will be no order as to costs.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 28.04.2023 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No kpl To
1. The District Collector District Collector Office Salem 636 001.
2. The Commissioner Panchayat Union Office Kadaiyampatti Panchayat Union Kadaiyampatti Salem 636 351.
T.RAJA, ACJ, and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J (kpl) 28.04.2023