M.Jeevitha v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE and W.M.P.(MD)No.11487 of 2025 M.Jeevitha ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office,
3. The Special Tahsildar, Adi-Dravidar Welfare(Unit- I),
4. The Village Administrative Officer, Village Administrative Office, Katchakatti Village, 1/6
5. The Revenue Inspector,
6. The Taluk Surveyor, Vadipatti Taluk,
7. The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station,
...Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2025 and to conduct proper investigation and issue free house site patta to the appropriate persons.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ramkumar For R1 to R6 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader For R7 : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The Writ on hand has been instituted to direct the respondents to dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 23.05.2025. 2/6
2.The High Court in exercise of the power of judicial review may not issue a direction to dispose of the representation in a routine manner, unless a person approaching the Court establishes right or infringement of right. Mere direction to dispose of the representation may cause prejudice to the public interest on some occasions. Few persons are abusing such direction of dispose of the representation through corrupt practices. Therefore, the High Court, while issuing direction to consider the representation, must ensure that a person approaching the Court has got a right or his rights are infringed, but not otherwise. 3.
In the present case, village people have given a joint representation to the District Collector, Madurai District, raising broad allegations, which may not form basis for issuing a direction to consider the representation. The District Collection may not be in a position to take a decision in such broad allegations, unless the petitioner makes out a case for initiation of further action. 4.Thus, this Court is not inclined to consider this Writ Petition. However, if any other grievances exist, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the authority concerned with specific grievances and by establishing his rights.
5.With the above observation, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S., J.) & (A.D.M.C., J.) 04.06.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Yuva To:-
1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office,
3. The Special Tahsildar, Adi-Dravidar Welfare(Unit- I),
4. The Village Administrative Officer, Village Administrative Office, Katchakatti Village,
5. The Revenue Inspector, 4/6
6. The Taluk Surveyor, Vadipatti Taluk,
7. The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, 5/6
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
Yuva 04.06.2025 6/6