Madras High CourtWP/32842/2025disposed of

S.Chandrasekaran v. The Additional Chief Secretary,

2025-08-28Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 28.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH S.Chandrasekaran

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Additional Chief Secretary, Chief Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Erode, Erode District.

3.The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Transmission Line Construction Circle, Athur Bypass, Odiapatti, Salem District.

4.The Executive Engineer, Electrical Construction Division, Athur Bypass, Odiapatti, Salem District.

5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gopichettipalayam, Erode, Erode District, Tamil Nadu.

1/6

6.The Village Administrative Officer, Kannapalli Village, P.K.Puthur, Anthiyur (TK), Erode District.

7.R.Paramasivam ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.07.2025 to furnish a certified report specifying the exact number of trees fell from the land up to 19.07.2025. For Petitioner : Ms.P.Anuradha For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader [R1 to R6] *****

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 22.07.2025 wherein the petitioner wants a report specifying the number of trees that were felled by the respondents from the property belonging to the petitioner.

2. Heard Ms.P.Anuradha, learned counsel for petitioner and 2/6

Mr.E.Vijay Anand, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6.

3. It is seen from records that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court and filed W.P.No.19758 of 2022 challenging the proceedings of the District Collector and for a consequential direction to fix adequate and reasonable compensation.

4. This writ petition was disposed of on 07.08.2024 by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate petition before the District Court in terms of Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that thereafter no application was filed before the District Judge since the petitioner had made a representation requesting the respondents to give a report as to how many trees were cut down.

6. In the considered view of this Court, it is within the personal 3/6

knowledge of the petitioner regarding the number of trees that were available in the land and the number of trees that were cut down by the respondents. Therefore, necessary allegation must be made in the application before the District Judge. In any case, during the pendency of the proceedings, the District Judge will call for a report regarding the same. Therefore, it defies comprehension as to why the petitioner has not even moved the District Judge in spite of the liberty granted by this Court in the earlier order passed in W.P.No.19758 of 2022 dated 07.08.2024.

7. In the light of the above discussion, even now it is left open to the petitioner to approach the concerned District Court and seek for the remedy and the petitioner can provide the information as to the number of trees that were cut down and seek for the compensation.

This writ petition is disposed in the above terms. No costs. 28.08.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No gm To 4/6