M.Kalaiselvi v. The Government Of Tamilnadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 10.02.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WP.No.18499/2014 & Mp.No.2/2014 1.M.Kalaiselvi 2.M.Ashok Kumar 3.M.Tamil Selvam ..
Petitioners
Versus
1. The Secretary Government of Tamilnadu Department of Local Administration St George Fort, Chennai.
2. The Executive Officer Pennagaram Panchayat Office No.29, Panchayat Office St., Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District.
3. P.C.R.Ashok Kumar ..
Respondents **R3 impleaded as per the order dated 14.10.2014 made in MP.No.1/2014 Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation dated 19.06.2014 within the stipulated time to enable the petitioner to get back their possession of the shop premises.
For Petitioners:
Mr.S.N.Amarnath For R1 :
Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, GA For R2 :
Mr.P.S.Jayakumar For R3 :
Mr.T.Saravanan
ORDER
Heard Mr.S.N.Amarnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, learned Government Advocate appearing for the 1st respondent ; Mr.P.S.Jayakumar, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and Mr.T.Saravanan, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent
and perused the material available on record including the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent.
2.The petitioners seek for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation dated 19.06.2014 within the stipulated time to enable the petitioner to get back their possession of the shop premises.
3.In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent it has been stated that pursuant to the representation made by the petitioners, an enquiry was conducted in which one of the petitioners, viz., M.Ashok Kumar, also participated on 05.07.2014 and he is said to sent a letter compromising the issue and has also withdrawn the representation dated 19.06.2014. 4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the submission is incorrect as there are serious violation committed and this has been pointed out by the petitioners and they have also referred to the conditions of the auction in this regard. 5.In the light of the above fact, the prayer sought for is only to consider the petitioners' representation and this Court cannot adjudicate beyond the scope of the prayer sought for. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, this will not preclude the petitioners from agitating their claim in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
AP -s/d- Assistant Registrar( ) Dt:16/2/2015 True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To
1. The Secretary Government of Tamilnadu Department of Local Administration St George Fort, Chennai.
2. The Executive Officer Pennagaram Panchayat Office No.29, Panchayat Office St., Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District.
+ 1 cc to the Govt. Pleader SR 7289 + 1 cc to Mr.S.Parthasarathy, Advocate SR 7140 + 1 cc to Mr.T.Saravanan, Advocate SR 7167 + 1 cc to Mr.S.N.Amarnath, Advocate SR 7257 pa(co) prk24/2 WP.No.18499/2014