Rajalakshmi M v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.02.2026 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and MP(MD)No.2213 of 2026 M.Rajalakshmi ... Petitioner vs.
1. The District Collector, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.
2. The Tahsildar, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.
3. The Block Development Officer, Pudukottai Panchayat Union, Pudukottai.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to construct the ration shop the place in which used by the petitioner to access their agricultural land situated in Survey No.3/1A, 3/1B Page No.1 of 6
situated at Sellukudi Village, Pudukottai Taluk and District and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 30.12.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Arun Jeyatram For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to construct the ration shop in the place which has been used by the petitioner to access her agricultural land situated in Survey No.3/1A, 3/1B situated at Sellukudi Village, Pudukottai Taluk and District and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2025 within a time frame.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is having agricultural land in the said survey number. Between her agricultural lands and road, there is a Government poramboke land which is being used by the petitioner for a long time as Page No.2 of 6
pathway to reach her agricultural lands. Now the respondents intend to put up a ration shop in the said poramboke lands thereby preventing the petitioner from using the said poramboke land to reach her agricultural lands.
3.
Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the respondents are not obstructing the free movement of the petitioner to reach her agricultural lands and that pathway is available to the petitioner. 4.
The above submission of the Special Government Pleader is recorded. Though learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is using the Government poramboke lands to reach her agricultural land, she is not in a position to apprise the Court as to what is the length and extent of the poramboke land, that she has been using as on date. In the absence of those details, this Court is not in a position to consider the case of the petitioner. Merely because the petitioner required access to reach her agricultural lands, she cannot ask the respondents not to put up ration shop. If there is any total blockage Page No.3 of 6
of pathway to the petitioner's agricultural lands, then the petitioner's case has to be considered by the respondents, upon the representation. In this regard, the petitioner has also made a representation dated 30.12.2025 to the respondents and the same has not been considered till date. Thus, it would be appropriate to direct the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation within a time frame. 5.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Connected WMP is closed. 02.02.2026 Index : Yes / No : Yes / No bala To
1. The District Collector, Pudukottai District, Page No.4 of 6
Pudukottai.
2. The Tahsildar, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.
3. The Block Development Officer, Pudukottai Panchayat Union, Pudukottai.
Page No.5 of 6
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
bala ORDER MADE IN DATED : 02.02.2026 Page No.6 of 6