Madras High CourtWP(MD)/19987/2015dismissed for not pressed

Meenakshi Sundaram v. The District Collector,

2016-11-02Honourable Mr Justice M.V. Muralidaran,Honourable Mr Justice S. Nagamuthu3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN W.P.[MD].No.19987 of 2015 and M.P.(MD).No.2 of 2015 1.Meenakshi Sundaram 2.Ramachandran 3.Ramapalaniyappan .. Petitioners Vs.

1.The District Collector, 2.The Tahsildar, Thirumayam & Taluk, 3.Commissioner, Block Development Officer, Thirumayam Panchayat Union, 4.The Managing Director, TNSTC Kumbakonam, Tanjore District.

5.The Chief Engineer (PWD), Trichy.

6.The Superintending Engineer (PWD), Trichy.

7.The Executive Engineer (PWD), Opp. New Municipality Office, Pudukkottai.

8.The Assistant Executive Engineer (PWD), ...

Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of S.No.11, Kallankuthu Poromboke over an extent of 4.88.5 hectares, Moongithapatti Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District. For Petitioners : Mr.N.Balakrishnan For respondents : Mr.T.R.Janarthanam, 1 to 3, 5 to 8 Addl. Government Pleader For 4th respondent : Mr.D.Sivaraman

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.] The petitioners have come up with this Writ Petition seeking to forbear the respondents from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of S.No.11, Kallankuthu Poromboke, over an extent of 4.88.5 hectares, Moongithapatti Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

2.We have heard the learned counsel on either side. 3.When it was pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioners that the question of possession is a disputed fact and the same can be decided only by the Civil Court, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he would not press this petition and he would seek liberty to work out the remedy elsewhere. He has also made an endorsement to that effect. 4.The General Manager of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Limited has filed a counter, wherein he has stated that the land in dispute is not in the occupation of the petitioners and that as a matter of fact, several public buildings have already been constructed on the said land. At any rate, as per the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedy elsewhere in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar

To 1.The District Collector, 2.The Tahsildar, Thirumayam & Taluk, 3.Commissioner, Block Development Officer, Thirumayam Panchayat Union, 4.The Managing Director, TNSTC Kumbakonam, Tanjore District.

5.The Chief Engineer (PWD), Trichy.

6.The Superintending Engineer (PWD), Trichy.

7.The Executive Engineer (PWD), Opp. New Municipality Office, Pudukkottai.

8.The Assistant Executive Engineer (PWD), +1 cc to The Special Government Pleader in SR.No.65322 GCG CSL/SS-2/18.11.2016 :3P/10C Order made in W.P.[MD].No.19987 of 2015 02.11.2016