Abdul Wahab.S v. The Dist.Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.ANANTHI and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.933, 935 & 936 of 2021 (Through Video Conferencing) S.Abdul Wahab : Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Public Works Department Rep. by its Executive Engineer, Irrigation Section NO.II Periyar Vaigai Basin Sub Division No.1 Madurai - 2.
3.The Junior Engineer The Public Works department Irrigation Section No.II Periyar Vaigai Basin Sub Division No.1, Madurai - 2.
: Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Form III Notice dated 06.01.2021 on the file of the respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and consequently forbear the respondents from evicting the petitioner in S.No.246/3b. Tallakulam Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District without following the due process of law.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi Special Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) By the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the third respondent, the petitioner was informed to remove the encroachments said to have been made over the water channel and the third respondent is 1/3
proceeding to undertake a demolition. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, submitted that on perusal of the impugned order passed, it is clear that it has been passed, without affording opportunity to the writ petitioner. A conclusion has already been arrived at in the impugned order that the writ petitioner has encroached. Without giving any show cause notice to the petitioner, the eviction proceedings are resorted to.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents.
4. A perusal of the impugned order itself would show that it is meant to be a show cause notice, that is why a specific reference has been made that show cause notice has been issued to the writ petitioner. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination they can be construed as final orders. If it is construed as final order, even then it is liable to be interfered with for want of notice.
5. Considering the above, while holding that impugned notice is merely a show cause notice and the opinion expressed by the third respondent is only prima facie in nature, we make it clear that the impugned notice is nothing but a show cause notice and therefore, appropriate order will have to be passed by the third respondent by way of speaking order, after the reply said to have been given by the writ petitioner. The order as aforesaid will have to be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to state that till such time, status quo as of today shall be maintained.
6. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T & P) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) RR Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. 2/3
To 1.The District Collector Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Public Works Department Rep. by its Executive Engineer, Irrigation Section NO.II Periyar Vaigai Basin Sub Division No.1 Madurai - 2.
3.The Junior Engineer The Public Works department Irrigation Section No.II Periyar Vaigai Basin Sub Division No.1, Madurai - 2.
+1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-2139,2153 & 2515) Order made in and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.933, 935 & 936 of 2021 Dated: 25.01.2021 SSS(CO) TR(11.02.2021) 3P 5C 3/3