Jeevanantham. S v. The District Revenue Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.01.2021 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA S.Jeevanantham ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer, O/o. The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Officer Cheranmahadevi Revenue Division, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Tahsildar Radhapuram Taluk, Radhapuram, Tirunelveli District.
4.The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
5.The Inspector of Police Panakudi Police Station, Panakudi, Tirunelveli District.
6.Sri Jeer Mutt rep. by its Abbot (Madathipathi), Thirukkarungudi, Nanguneri Taluk, Tirunelveli District.
... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to give necessary Police Protection to the petitioner and his siblings as well as their portions, over the properties, situated in Survey Nos.1876 to 2124, Block I and II, Valliyur North Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District, based on the representations of the petitioner, dated 10.11.2020 and 12.12.2020 1/3
For Petitioner : Mr.Antony S Prabakar For Respondents 1 to 5 : Mr.R.Saravana Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2.Heard, Mr.Antony S Prabakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Saravana Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 5. 3.The primordial submission of the petitioner is that the sixth respondent is attempting to trespass into his property situated in Survey Nos.1876 to 2124, Block I and II, Valliyur North Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District, and that they are also threatening the petitioner. According to him, he sent representations dated 10.11.2020 and 12.12.2020 to the respondents 4 and 5 seeking for police protection to him and his family members and that the respondent police did not consider his submissions. 4.Mr.R.Saravana Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl. side), who takes notice for the respondents 1 to 5, would contend that the representation, dated 12.
12.2020, submitted by the petitioner is registered as C.S.R.No.12 of 2021 dated 04.01.2021 and that the petitioner did not turn up for enquiry. 5.The petitioner undertakes to appear before the fifth respondent police for enquiry and the fifth respondent is directed to pass necessary orders on the petitioner's representation, dated 12.12.2020, after giving notice to the sixth respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Rm 2/3
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To 1.The District Revenue Officer, O/o. The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Officer Cheranmahadevi Revenue Division, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Tahsildar Radhapuram Taluk, Radhapuram, Tirunelveli District.
4.The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
5.The Inspector of Police Panakudi Police Station, Panakudi, Tirunelveli District.
6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.ANTONY S PRABAKAR, Advocate ( SR-502[F] dated 07/01/2021 ) 06.01.2021 mj(CO) TR(20.01.2021) 3P 8C 3/3