← Library
Madras High CourtWP/22649/2024disposed of

S.Pandarinathan v. The Chairman

2024-08-09Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.08.2024

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI S. Pandarinathan ....

Petitioner

Versus

1. The Chairman, Chepauk, (Post Box No.157),

2. The Managing Director, Chepauk, (Post Box No.157),

3. The Secretary, St. George Fort, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai - 600 009.

4. The Estate Officer - 6, No.2/123, Sri Thiyagarayar Road, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018.

5. The Executive Engineer, No.2/123, Sri Thiyagarayar Road, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018.

6. The Planning Officer, 1/5

Chepauk,(Post Box No.157), ...

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 01.02.2024 and direct the respondents to arrange to execute the sale deed in plot No.148 situate at Karunanithi 3rd cross street, Thandhai Periyar Nagar, Tharamani Division - II, Chennai - 600 113.

For Petitioner : Mr.N. Kamaraj For Respondents :Ms.K. Indumathy Venkatesan

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 01.02.2024 and direct the respondents to arrange to execute the sale deed in plot No.148 situate at Karunanithi 3rd cross street, Thandhai Periyar Nagar, Tharamani Division - II, Chennai - 600 113.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was the successful allottee of one vacant land, measuring an area of 50.0 sq. mts, at the subject place, vide Proceedings dated 25.01.1996 under a scheme. It is stated that the entire sale consideration was paid by the petitioner and by virtue of allotment order, dated 22.01.1996, the said vacant land was delivered to him and as such, he was in peaceful possession and occupation of the said land. While so, in the year 2014, again he got re-allotment of the land viz., plot No.148. Hence, he submitted various representations, lastly on 2/5

01.02.2024 to the respondents, ventilating his grievances and seeking appropriate orders for execution of the sale deed. Since the respondents have not taken any steps to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner, he has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

3. Though very many grounds have been raised in the above writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2024 and pass orders on merits within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection for said order being passed.

5. Considering the limited request sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2024 on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. No costs.

3/5

09.08.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order vsi2 To

1. The Chairman, Chepauk, (Post Box No.157),

2. The Managing Director, Chepuak, (Post Box No.157),

3. The Secretary, St. George Fort, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai - 600 009.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

vsi2 4/5

4. The Estate Officer - 6, No.2/123, Sri Thiyagarayar Road, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018.

5. The Executive Engineer, No.2/123, Sri Thiyagarayar Road, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018.

6. The Planning Officer, Chepauk,(Post Box No.157), 09.08.2024 5/5