Housing Board House Owners v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.08.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN W.P.(MD)No.13047 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD).No.9736 of 2019 Housing Board House owners Matric School Trust, represented by its President, N.Chandran.
... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. Revenue Divisional Office, Ramanathapuram.
2. The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Inspector of Police, Bazaar Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
5. A.Kamatchi
6. S.R.Ganesan
7. G.Mohan
8. M.Sulaiman
9. R.Karthick
10. B.Pushbalatha
11. T.Muruganantham ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents1 to 4 from interfering in the functioning of Housing Board House Owners Matric School trust situated at Moolakothalam, Ramanathapuram.
1/3
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R5 to R11 : Mr.K.Sivabalan
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the fourth respondent police not to interfere with the civil dispute between the parties.
2. Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is a dispute between the petitioner and the respondents 5 to 11 regarding running of Matriculation School. Now, in a civil dispute, the fourth respondent police unnecessarily interfering and restraining the petitioner from running the School.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 to 11 would submit that he has filed a change of vakalat and he is withdrawing his memo of appearance.
4. The fourth respondent has filed a status report stating that there is a dispute between two groups regarding formation of Trust and also running a Matriculation School and a complaint has also been filed before the fourth respondent police. Since there is a likelihood of law and order problem, the fourth respondent sent a report to the Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram to conduct a Peace Committee Meeting with both groups. Now, the Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram has also conducted a Peace Committee Meeting, wherein a settlement has been arrived at between the parties. Apart from that, the fourth respondent police is not interfering with the civil right.
5. Today, the Special Sub Inspector of Police, Ramanathapuram is present before this Court and on instructions, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that since there is a likelihood of law and order problem, due to dispute between two groups, they only request the Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram to conduct a Peace Committee Meeting. Apart from that, they are not interfering with the civil right of the parties.
6. Considering the fact that the fourth respondent police is not interfering with the civil dispute between the parties and they only sent a report to the Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram to conduct a Peace Committee Meeting, no further order is required to be passed in this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. However, the fourth respondent police is directed not to interfere with the civil dispute between the parties. No costs. Consequently, 2/3
the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. Revenue Divisional Office, Ramanathapuram.
2.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Inspector of Police, Bazaar Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
+1 CC to M/s.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate ( SR-80872[F] dt.09/08/2019 ) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.13047 of 2019 Dated: 08.08.2019 akv JMN(13.08.2019) 3P : 6C 3/3