A.Paulraj, v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI A.Paulraj :Petitioner .vs.

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram, 2.The Sub-Collector, 3.The Tahsildar, 4.Soundarammal.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachment made by the fourth respondent in the public street in Keelakudierruppu village which felt in Natham Survey No.490, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner :Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi For Respondents :Mr.A.Muthukaruppan 1 to 3 Addl.Govt.Pleader For Respondent-4 :Ms.Kaviya for Mr.N.Sekar

O R D E R

************* [Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM.,J.] We have heard Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr.A.Muthukaruppan, learned Additional Government 1/3

Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Ms.Kaviya, learned counsel representing Mr.N.Sekar, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent.

2.This Writ Petition is directed against the official respondents, more particularly, respondents 1 to 3 to remove the alleged encroachment made by the fourth respondent in a public road.

3.Ms.Kaviya, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that the fourth respondent is not an encroacher and he has got all documents in respect of S.No.491/1, whereas, the Petitioner seeks for removal of encroachment made in S.No.490. In any event, the Sub-Collector, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District directed the Tahsildar, Parakakudi, Ramanathapuram District to look into the grievance expressed by the Petitioner in his representation as early as on 13.6.2018.Therefore by now, the Tahsildar should have take further action and sent appropriate reply to the second respondent. It appears that till date the third respondent has not sent any reply to the second respondent.

4.Therefore, we direct the third respondent to take note of the proceedings of the second respondent, dated 13.6.2018 and take appropriate action in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 5.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar () // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) vsn To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram, 2.The Sub-Collector, 2/3

3.The Tahsildar, +1 CC to Mr.K.SUDALAIYANDI, Advocate(SR-97298[F] dated 11/11/2019 ) ORDER MADE IN 11.11.2019 VB(25.11.2019) 3P 5C 3/3