Chokkalingam v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.12.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN W.P.(MD)No.9454 of 2019 (Through video Conference) Chokkalingam .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vaiyampatti Police Station, Trichy District.

3.Kannusamy 4.Ravi .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 04.04.2019 and act upon the same within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For R1 and R2 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 04.04.2019. The perusal of the said representation, dated 04.04.2019 indicates that the respondents 3 and 4 and others in support of Oor Natamai try to grab the petitioner's land and house situated in S.No.733/2013. Resisting the same, he has initiated civil proceedings in O.S.No.58 of 2019 before the Additional District Munsif Court, Manaparai. While so, the private respondents and others called him for village panchayat and threatened him to withdraw the suit or else they will excommunicate him. As per their dictate, the other villagers has stopped communicating with him and nobody in the village come for work in the petitioner's field. Hence, seeking necessary action on the representation given to the District Collector on 04.04.2019 and on 12.04.2019, the present writ petition is filed. 1/3

2. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the State would submit that there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents regarding the house property and therefore, there was an attempt by the villagers to settle the matter amicable without resorting to Court proceedings which did not fructified. Therefore, the present complaint has been lodged by the petitioner herein and on enquiry, the petitioner agreed to pursue his remedy through Civil Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to the pressure given by the private respondents day-to-day life of the petitioner has become miserable and even access to public tap and temple and shops are prohibited to him and his family members.

4. The learned Government Advocate denied the said allegation and stated that the petitioner is peacefully living in the village and the allegation are only to cause inconvenience to his rival group against whom he has initiated Civil Suit.

5. This Court, by recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate, dispose this writ petition. No Costs. If really there is any difficulty or unlawful prohibition imposed upon the petitioner herein under the guise of excommunication, the same may be brought to the notice of the police for appropriate action. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) PJL Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.

To 1.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vaiyampatti Police Station, Trichy District.

2/3

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Copy to The Additional District Munsif, Manaparai.

W.P.(MD)No.9454 of 2019 15.12.2021 NSN(CO) KB(03.01.2022) 3P 5C 3/3