Lingasekar v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.12.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P(MD)No.24936 of 2016 Lingasekar Raja ..Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.

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

3.Vadivel ..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 consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.12.2016 seeking the first respondent to remove the encroachment made by the third respondent in the Pattikulam Lake situated in Survey No.4 of Thuraikudi Village and to stop illicit quarrying in the Pattikulam Lake.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anandakumar For Respondents 1 and 2 : Mr.M.Govindan, Special 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 respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioner on 14.12.2016 in respect of encroachments made in Survey No.4, Thuraikudi Village, Tiruchirappalli District, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus.

2.It is averred in the petition that in Survey No.4, Thuraikudi Village, Tiruchirappalli District, so many encroachments have been made and in order to remove the same, a representation has been given on 14.12.2016. But no action has been taken and therefore the present writ petition has been filed for getting the relief sought therein.

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

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has advanced his argument on the basis of averments made in the writ petition.

4.Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Considering the nature of the relief sought in the petition, notice need not be sent to the third respondent.

5.It is seen from the records that on 14.12.2016 the petitioner has given a representation wherein it has been clearly stated about the encroachments alleged to have been made in Survey No.4. The only gravamen expressed on the side of the petitioner is that no action has been taken on the side of the first respondent on the basis of the representation dated 14.12.2016. 6.Since the petitioner has given a representation dated 14.12.2016 with regard to alleged encroachments made in Survey No.4, this Court is of the view to pass the following order. 7.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the first respondent viz., District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District is directed to look into the representation dated 14.12.2016 alleged to have been given by the petitioner and take appropriate action within a period of one month. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.

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

+1cc to Mr.N.Anandakumar, Advocate in SR.83544 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader in SR.83570 W.P(MD)No.24936 of 2016 23.12.2016 smn PBK/SS-3/SAR-I 05.01.2017 ::2P-5C:

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