← Library
Madras High CourtWP/14770/2020disposed of

G.Munnusamy v. The District Collector

2022-03-07Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.03.2022 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.No.14770 of 2020 G.Munusamy .. Petitioner vs

1. The District Collector, Chengalput District, O/o.The District Collectorate, Chengalpet.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Chengalput Collectorate Campus, Chengalpet.

3. The Tahsildar, O/o.The Madurantagam Taluk, Madurantagam, Chengalpet District.

4. Sivaprakasam

5. Bhakiyalakshmi

6. Vikashmetha

7. Goutham

8. Sampathraj Metha .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action to retrieve the Government dry lands of an extent of 23 acres in survey numbers 26/1, 27/2, 27/3, 59, 60, 61/1, 61/2, 63/1, 64/1B2A, 64/2, 7/1, 73/1B1 coming within the jurisdiction of Ward No. 14, Rawthanallur Village, Acharapakkam Town Panchayat, Madurantagam Taluk, Chengalpet District and cancel the joint patta No.609 in the name of private persons and restore the same to the Government based on the representation of the petitioner dated 12.02.2018. For the Petitioner :

Mr.Mahaveer sivaji for Mr.K.Anandhu For the Respondents :

Mr.P.Muthukumar State Govt. Pleader for RR 1 to 3 :

Mr.V.Vijay Shankar for RR 4 to 8

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The writ petition was filed to seek a direction on the official respondents to retrieve the dry lands to the extent of 23 acres situated in S.Nos.26/1, 27/2, 27/3, 59, 60, 61/1, 61/2, 63/1, 64/1B2A, 64/2, 7/1, 73/1B1 of Ward No. 14, Rawthanallur Village, Acharapakkam Town Panchayat, Madurantagam Taluk, Chengalpet District.

2. The learned State Government Pleader submits the encroachments have been removed pursuant to the representation of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has shown satisfaction of the same.

3. Thus, the writ petition has become infructuous and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, the learned counsel appearing for the private respondents submits that their rights be preserved in reference to the petition challenging the action of the official respondents pursuant to the representation of the petitioner.

In view of the above, while dismissing the writ petition as rendered infructuous, the rights of the private respondents are preserved for the action taken by the official respondents. The dismissal of the writ petition or for that any direction would not affect the private respondents for taking legal remedies against the action of the official respondents. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sra To:

1. The District Collector, Chengalput District, O/o.The District Collectorate, Chengalpet.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Chengalput Collectorate Campus, Chengalpet.

3. The Tahsildar, O/o.The Madurantagam Taluk, Madurantagam, Chengalpet District.

+1cc to Mr.V.Vijay Shankar, Advocate, S.R.No.15333 +1cc to Mr.K.Anandhu, Advocate, S.R.No.15414 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.15496 W.P.No.14770 of 2020 PA(CO) CT 11/03/2022