S.Kathalingam v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.09.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN W.P.[MD].No.12957 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)No.9758 of 2016 S.Kathalingam : Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Collectorate Office, 2.The Divisional Engineer, (Construction and Maintenance), Highways Department, Alagarkovil Road, Madurai-2.
3.The Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai, Anna Maligai, Madurai-20.
4.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, 5.The Tahsildar, Madurai South, Tiruparankundram, Madurai-5.
6.R.Karmegam 7.R.Nallamani : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachment of small Karuppanasamy Temple -cum- Rakayee Ammal Samadhi and the street vendors in front of the Temple at S.No.226/4A and S.No.226/4B Madakulam Village, Bye-Pass Road, S.S. Colony, Madurai which is reconstructed illegally after demolition in 2005 and direct the authorities to lay pacca road in that Government land Bye-Pass Road, within a stipulated time as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar For Respondents 1,2,4&5: Mr.T.R.Janarthanan, Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.3 : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvam For Respondent No.6 : Mr.V.Vinayagamoorthy For Respondent No.7 : No Appearance
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.] This is a Public Interest Litigation filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to remove a Temple known as 'Karuppanasamy Temple -cum- Rakayee Ammal Samadhi' erected in Survey Nos.226/4A and 226/4B at Madakulam Village, Bye-Pass Road, S.S.Colony, Madurai.
2. According to the petitioner, these lands belonged to the State Highways Department.
3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and we have also perused the records carefully.
4. It is seen from the records that originally the entire extent of property comprised in Survey No.226/4 belonged to the sixth respondent and his predecessors-in-title. A portion of the said land measuring 33 cents was acquired by the Government for the purpose of State Highways. The survey number was also subdivided as 226/4A and 226/4B. The remaining land, after the acquisition, which was in the hands of the sixth respondent, was sub-divided as Survey No.226/4C. Regarding this property, there is no issue. Regarding the acquisition of the portion of the properties comprised in Survey Nos.226/4A and 226/4B, a challenge was made by one Rakkappa Konar in W.P.No.522 of 1961. Mr.Rakkappa Konar is the grandfather of the sixth respondent. But, by order dated 11.12.1962, the said Writ Petition was dismissed.
Thus, the acquisition stands confirmed. Thereafter, it is alleged that the sixth respondent filed yet another Writ Petition before the Principal Bench in W.P.No.4487 of 2004 for certain reliefs. It appears that there was a Writ Appeal also in the same matter. Ultimately, this Court gave liberty to the sixth respondent to file a suit for relief in respect of the said property.
5. According to the sixth respondent, Karuppanasamy Temple is situated in Survey No.226/4A and the said land is still in
possession continuously and the possession was never taken by the authorities under the Land Acquisition Act.
6. It is also seen from the records that a suit was filed by the sixth respondent in O.S.No.549 of 2005. However, the same was, later on, withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit. A fresh suit has been now filed by the sixth respondent in O.S.No.511 of 2016 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Madurai, on 17.08.2016 i.e., long after the filing of the present Public Interest Litigation, wherein he has claimed title in respect of the property in Survey No.226/4A. According to the sixth respondent, as per the new Land Acquisition Act, the title still stands with him, as the possession was never taken by the Government.
7. The learned counsel for the sixth respondent would further bring to our notice that there are two Writ Petitions in W.P.(MD) Nos.16406 and 16202 of 2016, wherein the sixth respondent claimed some relief. In those Writ Petitions, interim orders have been issued by this Court, directing the respondents to maintain status quo.
8. In our considered view, when there is such an interim order by the competent Court, after examining the issue as to whether there is any encroachment or whether such encroachment is to be removed or not, it is not possible for this Court to issue any direction in this Public Interest Litigation. The parties are at liberty to work out their remedy before the Civil Court or before the Writ Court, where the Writ Petitions are pending. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/ Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate Office, 2.The Divisional Engineer, (Construction and Maintenance), Highways Department, Alagarkovil Road, Madurai-2.
3.The Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai, Anna Maligai, Madurai-20.
4.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, 5.The Tahsildar, Madurai South, Tiruparankundram, Madurai-5.
+1cc to M/S.S.Manoharan,Advocate in SR.No.54597 +1cc to M/S.N.Shanmuga Selvam, Advocate in SR.No.54816 +1cc to M/S.V.Vinayagamurthy, Advocate in SR.No.54851 Order made in W.P.[MD].No.12957 of 2016 Dated: 22.09.2016 SML PA/GSV-PM/SAR I/26.09.2016/4P/9C