Venkatesan v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA Venkatesan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats) Arni Panchayat Union, Arni, Thiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to issue necessary direction to the 2nd respondent to release the remaining amount of Rs.1,43,971/- of the sanctioned amount of Rs.1,70,000/- sanctioned under the PMAY scheme by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings SECC No.128763720 PMAY-G No.TN 128763720 dated 10.05.2023 to construct a house in the petitioner's favour based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2025 made to the respondents.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabakar For Respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan Addl. Government Pleader for R1 Mr.V.Velusamy Add.Government Pleader for R2

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to issue necessary direction to the 2nd respondent to release the remaining amount of Rs.1,43,971/- of the sanctioned amount of Rs.1,70,000/- sanctioned under the PMAY scheme by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings SECC No.128763720 PMAY-G No.TN 128763720 dated 10.05.2023, to construct a house, based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2025, made to the respondents.

2. With the consent of both side counsels the main writ petition is taken up for disposal.

3. The petitioner is an agricultural coolie and belongs to economic weaker section. The petitioner was selected as a beneficiary under PMAY scheme, was sanctioned an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- by the 2nd respondent, and out of the said sanctioned amount the 1st installment of Rs.26,029/- was

released. While so, the petitioner was falsely implicated as an accused in a murder case and therefore the 2nd respondent without releasing the balance sanctioned amount, pressurised the petitioner to refund the 1st installment amount. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents on 24.01.2025, requesting the 2nd respondent to release the balance sanctioned amount. As no action was taken on the petitioner's representation, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that it would suffice, if this Court direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2025, on merits and pass orders within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents prayed for reasonable time to dispose the representation.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the second respondent, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2025, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 05.06.2025 dpq Index : Yes /No Speaking Order : Yes/No To

1. The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats) Arni Panchayat Union, Arni, Thiruvannamalai District.

N. MALA, J.

dpq 05.06.2025