Madras High CourtWP/27250/2022disposed of

L.Santhanalakshmi v. The District Collector

2023-07-04Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice P.D.Audikesavalu6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.07.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU L.Santhanalakshmi ..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector District Collector Office Chenglepet District Chenglepet - 603 001.

2. The Block Development Officer Block Development Office Kattankalathur.

3. The District Revenue Officer Chengalpattu District.

4. The Revenue Divisional Officer Vandalur Taluk Chengalpattu District.

5. The Commissioner of Police Tambaram Commissioner Office Karapakkam, Sholinganallur.

6. The Inspector of Police Otteri Police Station Otteri, Chengalpattu District - 600 048.

7. Chandrasekaran ..

Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.09.2022 & 13.09.2022 and direct the first respondent to remove the illegal encroachment in Survey No.57/2A measuring 6.9 cents in No.11 Kolapakkam Village, Vandalur Taluk, Chengalpattu District, marked as Anand Road in the MMDA approved layout vide No.P.P.D./L.O.No.14 dated 25.08.1993 and approved letter No.L1/99/93 dated 04.02.1993. For the Petitioner : Ms.A.Shenbaga for Mr.P.Chandrasekar For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for R1 to R4 & R6 Mr.P.Srinivas for R5 Mr.M.Santhanaraman for R7

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Ms.A.Shenbaga, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.P.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4 & 6, Mr.P.Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent 5 and Mr.M.Santhanaraman, learned counsel for respondent 7.

2. The petitioner alleges encroachment on the part of the land, that is gifted to the Kattankulathur Village Panchayat Union.

3. Where as, according to the learned counsel for the seventh respondent, no encroachment has been made by the seventh respondent. The seventh respondent is in his own land and has not encroached upon the road / public space.

4. It appears that, in case there is no encroachment or obstruction on the public roads or the land belonging to the Panchayat Union Council or the Village Panchayat, then, a remedy is available under Section 131 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.

The petitioner, if so advised, may approach the Village Administrative Officer or the Authority or the Commissioner concerned or the Revenue Department. In case such a representation is made by the petitioner, the same shall be considered, on merits and in accordance with law and a decision shall be taken expeditiously.

5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.17604 of 2023 is closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.) 04.07.2023 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No drm