Madras High CourtWP/16707/2017disposed of

Muthaaiyi, v. The District Collector

2018-02-28Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:28.02.2018 C O R A M THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No.16707 of 2017 and WMP No.18084 of 2017 Muthaaiyi

...Petitioner

vs 1.The District Collector, Namakkal District.

2.The Commissioner, The Department of Mines & Minerals, Guindy, Chennai.

3.The Assistant Director, The Department of Mines & Minerals, 2nd Floor, The District Collector Office, Namakkal, Namakkal District.

4.The District Revenue Officer, The Office of the District Revenue Office, Namakkal, Namakkal District.

5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, The Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Namakkal Division, Namakkal Division.

6.The Tahsildar, Namakkal Taluk Office, Namakkal.

7.S.Rajamani The President, Sri Amman Women Self Help Group, No.1/12, Thalaampadi Village, Namakkal Taluk & District.

...Respondents

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the

respondents to consider her representation dated 02.06.2017 regarding the illegal quarrying activities being done by the seventh respondent in Government Promboke land and adjacent Hilly Mountain Senthamangalam Sub Registrar Office in Thalampadi Village, Namakkal District beyond the Government permissive level and creating obstruction in the petitioner's land and in public using pathway.

For petitioner : Mr.S.Silambu Selvan For Respondents: Mr.R.Govindasamy Special Government Pleader for R1 to R6 No Appearance for R7

O R D E R

The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider her representation dated 02.06.2017, wherein and whereby she made a complaint against the seventh respondent, as if she has involved in some illegal quarry operation at the Government poramboke land referred to in the writ petition.

2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the said representation has not been considered so far.

3. Though notice was ordered to the seventh respondent and the same was served, she has not chosen to appear before this Court. Her name is printed in the cause list. Therefore, this Court is left with no other option except to direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner as well as the seventh respondent. Such exercise shall be done by the first respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vri

To 1.The District Collector, Namakkal District.