M.Kuppusamy v. The Member Secretary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :01.4.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.9515 of 2015 and MP.No.1 of 2015
1. M.Kuppusamy
2. M.Alexader
3. S.Pakkiri
4. M.Bhaskar
5. P.Annadurai
6. V.Annapoorani
7. M.Selvamani
8. P.Dhanappan
9. M.Jaya 10.M.Sridhar 11.V.Thenmozhi 12.S.Arul 13.S.Manimozhi 14.M.Chockalingam 15.V.Murthy Pillai 16.B.S.Sunderarajan 17.M.Venkatesan 18.M.Mariammal 19.K.Aadish Prabhakaran 20.S.Vinayagam 21.R.Vibushanan 22.S.Kotteswari 23.M.Annavi 24.A.Saravana Sundaram 25.M.Muthu 26.M.Jeevanandham 27.P.Santha 28.E.Eagambaram 29.M.Devaraj 30.D.Rani 31.M.Pandurangan 32.S.Viji 33.R.Srinivasan 34.M.Ramasamy 35.B.Shankar Ganesh 36.V.Elangovan 37.V.Venkat Kumar 38.K.Raj 39.A.Bhoopalan 40.A.Karpagam 41.M.Murthy 42.M.Jayaraman
43.T.Mahendran 44.U.Siraj Ahmed 45.S.Selvarani 46.Elumalai ..Petitioners
Versus
1. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore Chennai - 600 008
2. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by the District Collector Kancheepuram District Kancheepuram
3. The Thasildar Chengalpet Taluk, Chengalpet.
..Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to forbear from dispossessing the petitioners by considering their representation dated 23.03.2015 made to the Second Respondent and 25.03.2015 made to the Third and First Respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Elango For R1 : Mr.R.Vijayakumar Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.A.Yasmeen
O R D E R
The petitioners have come forward with this writ petition seeking for a direction upon the respondents to forbear from dispossessing them by considering their representation dated 23.03.2015 made to the Second Respondent and 25.03.2015 made to the Third and First Respondent.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property in question. According to the petitioners, the respondents are trying to evict them from the said place without following due process of law. The petitioners have made individual representations before the respondents in this regard. Since no orders were passed on the said representations, the petitioners are before this Court.
3. The only grievance of the petitioners is that till the representations are disposed of by the respondents one way or other, their possession should not be disturbed.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent as well as the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that till the representations submitted by the petitioners are disposed of by the respondents, the petitioners will not be disturbed.
5. Taking into account the above submissions, the respondents are directed not to disturb the petitioners till the representations submitted by the petitioners are disposed of. This Court makes it very clear that the petitioners shall be given an opportunity of being heard before passing orders on the representations. If the petitioners fail to appear on the date to be fixed by the respondents for personal hearing, the respondents are at liberty to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, by marking their non appearance.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ga To
1. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore Chennai - 600 008
2. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by the District Collector Kancheepuram District Kancheepuram
3. The Thasildar Chengalpet Taluk, Chengalpet.
+ 1 cc to Mr.K. Elango, Advocate SR.18640 + 1 cc Government Pleader Sr.18749 GJ(CO) EU 17.04.2015 W.P.No.9515 of 2015