S.Sakthi Maheswari v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2024 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy W.P.No.17675 of 2022
1. S.Sakthi Maheswari
...Petitioners
2. S.Sakthi Viswanathan Vs.
The Commissioner Thiruvannamalai Municipality, Thiruvannamalai - 606 601.
...Respondent
Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider our representation dated 19.05.2022 seeking to include the names of the first and second petitioners in the assessment order 040/015/00250 (old assessment no.040/11350) and 040/013/00273 (old assessment no.040/10274) along with the name of Nithya pertaining to our share of the property situated at 45, Annasalai, Thiruvannamalai and Door No.70/5, New Karkana Street, Thiruvannmalai within the stipulated time 1/6
For Petitioners : Mr.P.Veeraraghavan For Respondent : Mr. L.P.Maurya Standing Counsel Order This Writ Petition is filed seeking for a mandamus upon the respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 19.05.2022 seeking to include the names of the first and second petitioners in the assessment order 040/015/00250 (old assessment no.040/11350) and 040/013/00273 (old assessment no.040/10274) along with the name of Nithya pertaining to our share of the property situated at 45, Annasalai, Thiruvannamalai and Door No.70/5, New Karkana Street, Thiruvannmalai within the stipulated time.
2. The case of the petitioners in short is that petitioners 1 and 2 are grand daughter and grandson of late Dr.A.Ramamurthy. The said Dr.A.Ramamurthy, executed a settlement deed dated 07.05.2010, in Doc.No.4468 of 2010, in favour of the petitioners, at the time of settlement, the petitioners were minors aged 10 and 8 respectively, and they were 2/6
represented by their mother guardian Agalya. Now, the petitioners attained majority, hence, they made a representation to the respondent dated 19.05.2022 seeking to include their names with the new assessment numbers 040/015/00250 and 040/013/00273 along with the name of Nithya, who was given right under the settlement deed executed by the aforesaid later Dr.A.Ramamurthy, and to assess the tax in respect of the property standing their names. Though the said representation was acknowledged by the respondent on 29.05.2022, however no effective steps were taken to redress our grievance. Hence, the present Writ Petition.
3. Mr.P.Veeraraghavan., learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the representation made by the petitioners may be directed to be considered and disposed of by the respondent in a time bound manner. would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed.
4. Mr. L.P.Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent would submit that the representation made by the petitioners would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed. 3/6
5. Heard Mr.P.Veeraraghavan., learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. L.P.Maurya learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
6. Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this Writ Petition and in view of the above submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipality, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondent-Municipality to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 19.05.2022 and dispose of the same by taking an independent decision based on the facts and circumstances of the case, within a period of six weeks week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs. 11.09.2024 sd Index : yes/no 4/6
To The Commissioner Thiruvannamalai Municipality, Thiruvannamalai - 606 601.
5/6
Krishnan Ramasamy,J., sd W.P.No.17675 of 2022 28.08.2024 6/6