Susila, v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.03.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN W.P(MD)No.4024 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.3200 of 2017 Susila .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Peraiyur Taluk Office, Madurai District.

3.The Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Sedapatty, Madurai District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to forbear the second respondent to demolish the petitioner's house situated in Survey No.86/9, Old Survey No.86/1Pa at Athikaripatty Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.03.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muniyandi For Respondents : Mr.K.Guru, Additional Government Pleader.

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the first respondent to forbear the second respondent from demolishing the house of the petitioner situates in Survey No.86/9, Old Survey No.86/1Pa, Athikaripatty Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.Mr.K.Guru, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that in respect of Survey No.86/9, Old Survey No.86/1Pa, a patta has been issued in favour of the petitioner wherein she put up a dwelling house and now the second respondent without giving opportunity to the petitioner has made attempts to demolish the same and under the said circumstances a representation has also been given on 06.03.2017, but the same has not been considered.

4.It is seen from the records that with regard to Survey No.86/9, Old Survey No.86/1Pa, a patta has been granted in favour of the petitioner.

5.The main contention putforth on the side of the petitioner is that even without giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, the second respondent has attempted to demolish the house of the petitioner. Under the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to pass the following order. 6.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the second respondent is strictly directed to look into the representation dated 06.03.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of fifteen days. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Peraiyur Taluk Office, Madurai District.

3.The Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Sedapatty, Madurai District.

+1cc to Mr.S.Muniyandi,Advocate, Sr No.13225 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.4024 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.3200 of 2017 08.03.2017 smn MS/CM.MSA/8.3.2017/2P.5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/