Madras High CourtWP(MD)/11492/2019disposed of

R.Thangam, v. The District Collector

2020-02-20Honourable Mrs Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:20.02.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8764 & 8765 of 2019 R.Thangam ... Petitioner Vs.

1) The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2) The Divisional Forest Officer, Sivagangai Division, No.18, Master Plain Complex, Sivagangai.

3) The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

4) The Tahsildar, Ilayangudi Taluk, Sivagangai District.

5) The Forest Ranger, Social Forest Division, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District.

6) M.Thirupathi

7) S.P.P.Razeem ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in his proceeding in Na.Ka.No.55/2018/dated 23.03.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the 5th respondent to issue fresh work order by clearly mentioning the Pula Number and extent for which the 1/3

auction was conducted and confirmed in favour of the 6th respondent by conducting enquiry thereby providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Prahalad Ravi For RR 1 to 5 : Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi, Special Government Pleader For R-6 : Mr.Karthikeya Venkatachalapathy For R-7 : No Appearance

O R D E R

Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5.

2. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.55/2018/dated 23.03.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the 5th respondent to issue fresh work order by clearly mentioning the Pula Number and extent for which the auction was conducted and confirmed in favour of the 6th respondent by conducting enquiry thereby providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

4. Today, when the matter was taken up, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would state that there was a confirmation regarding the revenue land and forest land situated in the same survey number. While so, due to heavy rains, the petitioner could not complete cutting of Seemaikaruvelam trees and has sought for extension of time by addressing the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent is also said to have responded to the same and recommended to the third respondent in Na.Ka.A10/4295/2017, dated 26.04.2018.

5. Now, the petitioner is willing to restrict his prayer only for a Mandamus, to consider his representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Challenge to the impugned notice is withdrawn by him. Therefore, the third respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders based on the recommendations of the fourth respondent dated 26.04.2018, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above observations, the writ petition stands 2/3

disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) sts To