← Library
Madras High CourtWP/19858/2019disposed of

K.Magadevan v. The District Collector,

2019-07-16Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice M.Duraiswamy3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.07.2019 CORAM :

The Hon'ble Mrs.VIJAYA K.TAHILRAMANI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P. No.19858 of 2019 K.Magadevan ... Petitioner -vs1.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District, Kanchipuram.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpet, Kanchipuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruporur, Kanchipuram District.

4.Jagadeesan ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 03.12.17 seeking to remove the encroachment made by the 4th respondent in poromboke lands comprised in S.No.75/1 and 90, situated at Panchantiruthi Village, Gunnampattu Panchayat, Tiruporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Jeremiah for M/s.D.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.G.Jeremiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 has encroached on the Government poramboke land comprised in Survey Nos.75/1 and 90 situated at Panchantiruthi Village, Gunnampattu Panchayat, Tiruporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District. Aggrieved by the said encroachment, the petitioner has preferred a representation dated 03.12.2017 to the District Collector, Kanchipuram District i.e., respondent No.1 with a copy marked to the Tahsildar, Thiruporur i.e., respondent No.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he had preferred representation on 03.12.2017, the said representation has not yet been disposed of till date by the authorities.

3. The learned Government Advocate states that respondent No.3, the Tahsildar, Thiruporur Taluk, is the appropriate authority to consider the representation of the petitioner. As stated earlier, copy of the representation dated 03.12.2017 has already been marked to respondent No.3.

4. In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without going into the merits of matter, we direct respondent No.3 i.e., the Tahsildar, Thiruporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 03.12.2017, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving notice to respondent No.4.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

To 1.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District, Kanchipuram.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpet, Kanchipuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruporur, Kanchipuram District.

+2cc to Mr.D.Krishnamoorthy, Advocate Sr.60649 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.60258 W.P.No.19858 of 2019 nr[co] srg 08/08/2019