← Library
Madras High CourtWP/33353/2024dismissed

Mrs.Neela v. The Commissioner Of Police

2024-11-13Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.11.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Neela ... Petitioner versus

1. The Commissioner of Police, Avadi Police Commissionerate, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.

2. The Inspector of Police, T9-Pattabiram Police Station, Pattabiram, Chennai - 600 072.

3. P.Sankar

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner with respect to 64 cents of land in Karunakaracheri Village comprised in S.No.68/1, Avadi Taluk, Tiruvallur District based on the petitioner's representation dated 01.10.2024 to clear the vegetation in the said land.

For Petitioner :

Mr.V.M.Venkataramana For Respondents :

Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2 Pg.Nos.1/5

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to clear the vegetation in her land measuring an extent of 64 cents in Karunakaracheri Village comprised in S.No.68/1, Avadi Taluk, Tiruvallur District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 01.10.2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.No.68/1, Avadi Taluk, Tiruvallur District. While that being so, the Karunakaracheri Municipality directed the petitioner to clear the overgrown vegetation in her land. However, the third respondent herein and his associates prevented the petitioner from doing so, the petitioner filed a complaint against the third respondent, but no action has been taken. Thus, the petitioner has given a representation to the second respondent to provide adequate protection to clear the overgrown vegetation in her land. Since the second respondent had not taken any steps, the present petition has been filed.

Pg.Nos.2/5

3. However, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent is purely civil in nature.

4. It is seen from the records that as the dispute alleged by the petitioner is purely civil in nature, therefore, this Court is not inclined to give any positive direction to the second respondent/Police to provide Police protection to the petitioner to clear the vegetation in her land, as it is for the petitioner to workout her remedy before the competent Civil Court in the manner known to law.

5. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

13.11.2024 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms Pg.Nos.3/5

To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Avadi Police Commissionerate, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.

2. The Inspector of Police, T9-Pattabiram Police Station, Pattabiram, Chennai - 600 072.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Pg.Nos.4/5

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

ms 13.11.2024 Pg.Nos.5/5