R.Maria Dhasammal v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.02.2025 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL R.Maria Dhasammal ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District 29, Acharimar S 2nd St, Meenakshipuram, Vadiveeswaram Village, Ozhuginasery, Nagarcoil 629 001.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Colachel Sub Division, Colachel, Kanyakumari District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Colachel Police Station, Colachel, Kanyakumari District.
4. Kalaiselvan Village Administrative Officer, Ritapuram Taluk, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari.
...Respondents
1/6
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide adequate police protection to the construction of compound wall in the petitioner's land bearing Survey No. 289/10, Ritapuram Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 27.01.2025 within a time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Anto Prince, For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R4 : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar Government Advocate
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to provide adequate police protection to the construction of compound wall in the petitioner's land bearing Survey No. 289/10, Ritapuram Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 27.01.2025. 2/6
2.According to the petitioner, she is the owner of the said property and she also got patta in her favour. While so, she attempted to raise construction in the said land but one Raja obstructed the construction and she lodged a complaint before the third respondent and the same was enquired and he was warned and thereafter, he has not interfered with the construction of the petitioner. Now, the fourth respondent interfered with the plaintiff's possession and orally instructed not to put up construction. Therefore, she sent a representation, dated 27.01.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition has been filed. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that already the petitioner lodged a complaint as against one Raja and the same was closed after enquiry and now once again, she lodged a complaint as against the fourth respondent on 27.01.2025 and the same is under consideration and it will be disposed of within one week.
4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private 3/6
respondent, is inclined to pass order.
5.Since the third respondent has admitted the receipt of the petitioner's complaint, the third respondent is directed to complete the enquiry within a period of one week in accordance with law. 6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 25.02.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR 4/6
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, 29, Acharimar S 2nd St, Meenakshipuram, Vadiveeswaram Village, Ozhuginasery, Kanyakumari District Nagarcoil 629 001.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Colachel Sub Division, Colachel, Kanyakumari District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Colachel Police Station, Colachel, Kanyakumari District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer, Ritapuram Taluk, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P.DHANABAL , J.
LR 25.02.2025 6/6