R.Jayalakshmi, v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14.10.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Writ Petition No.35329 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.30415 of 2016 R.Jayalakshmi ... Petitioner vs.

1. The District Collector, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

3. The Block Development Officer, Vadaranyam Panchayat Union, Nagapattinam District.

4. The Thasildar, Vadaranyam, Nagapattinam District.

5. Chitravel ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering in 1/6

any manner whatsoever with the petitioner's possession of land comprised in Survey No.134/11 of an extent of 24,000 sq.ft. situated in Kodikarai Village.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Lakshmi Narayanan for M/s.I.Bobby Portia For Respondents : Ms. Geetha Senthikumar for R5 Ms.U.Bharanidharan Additional Government Pleader for RR1 to 4

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering in any manner whatsoever with the petitioner's possession of land comprised in Survey No.134/11 of an extent of 24,000 sq.ft. situated in Kodikarai Village.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and his sister are in possession and enjoyment of the above said Natham Poramboke land situated in said Village. Pursuant to the order of the Government, Revenue Department vide order number 10630/2006 dated 13.12.2006, Patta in respect of the aforesaid land was issued by the Tahsildar, Vedaranyam in favour of the petitioner. However, the fourth and fifth respondents gave 2/6

hindrance to the petitioner's possession. In order to refrain the respondents 4 and 5, the petitioner made a representation dated 26.05.2014, before the first respondent, but the same was not considered by the first respondent. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the aforesaid relief.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the Patta was granted by the Tahsildar, Vedaranyam vide order dated 13.12.2006, the third and fourth respondents gave hindrance to the petitioner's possession. Hence it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondents to forbear them from interfering with the petitioner's possession.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 relied upon the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent and submitted that the petitioner's possession will not be disturbed without following due process of law.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent did not dispute 3/6

the facts submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4.

6. Recording the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, no further adjudication is necessary in the present Writ Petition. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

14.10.2022 RAP Index :

Yes/No Speaking order :

Yes/No 4/6

To:

1. The District Collector, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

3. The Block Development Officer, Vadaranyam Panchayat Union, Nagapattinam District.

4. The Thasildar, Vadaranyam, Nagapattinam District.

5/6

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

RAP 14.10.2022 6/6