Madras High CourtWP/21516/2023dismissed

S.Chinnaponnu v. The Principal Secretary To Revenue Department

2023-07-20Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.07.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR S.Chinnaponnu .. Petitioner

Versus

1.The Principal Secretary of Revenue Department Chepauk, Chennai 2.The District Collector District Collectorate, Cuddalore 3.The Deputy Director General of Police Villupuram Range 4.The District Superintendent of Police Cuddalore District 5.The District Revenue Officer District Collectorate, Cuddalore District 6.The Revenue Divisional Officer Virudhachalam Revenue Division Cuddalore District 7.The Tahsildar Thittakudi Revenue Taluk Cuddalore District 8.Kaliyamurthy 9.Santhosh 10.Suresh 11.Arunachalam .. Respondents 1/4

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 04.05.2023 to take necessary departmental action against the government officers namely (1)Mr.Kaliyamurthy, Sub Inspector of Police, (2) Mr.Santhosh, Revenue Village Administrative Officer, T.Enthal Village, Tittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District/9th respondent (3) Mr.Suresh, Village Assistant, T.Enthal Village, Tittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District/10th respondent and (4)Mr.Arunachalam, Panchayat President, T.Enthal Village, Tittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District/11th respondent who acted illegally without following any rule of law and committed human rights violation opposed to the principles of natural justice. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Dharani For Respondents : Mr.S.Prabhakaran for R1 to R7 Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 04.05.2023 to take necessary departmental action against respondents 8 to 11.

2. It is the case of the writ petitioner that in his private land, the respondents 8 to 11 had trespassed without any notice and caused damages to her land without following any rules.

3. The learned Government Advocate, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner has encroached into the temple property and the officials have removed the encroachment and now, the petitioner has given a representation. 2/4

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record. It is relevant to note that the petitioner has not produced any documents whatsoever before this Court to substantiate the claim that he is the owner of the properties. If at all, the petitioner is aggrieved, his remedy lies elsewhere and not by giving a representation and getting a plain direction from this Court. In fact, the petitioner innocuously seeks to take action against the respondents 8 to 11.

5. In such view of the matter, this Writ Court cannot be used to settle the personal disputes. Accordingly, I do not find any merits in this case and this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

20.07.2023 dhk Internet: Yes/No To 1.The Principal Secretary of Revenue Department Chepauk, Chennai 2.The District Collector District Collectorate, Cuddalore 3.The Deputy Director General of Police Villupuram Range 3/4

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk 4.The District Superintendent of Police Cuddalore District 5.The District Revenue Officer District Collectorate, Cuddalore District 6.The Revenue Divisional Officer Virudhachalam Revenue Division Cuddalore District 7.The Tahsildar Thittakudi Revenue Taluk Cuddalore District W.P.No.21516 of 2023 20.07.2023 4/4