Jansy Rani v. The District Collector,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Jansy Rani ...Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Kenikarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
5.The President, Theivendrakula Velalar Sangam, Indira Nagar, Ramanathapuram District.
1/6
6.Ananthan 7.Balamurugan 8.Vel Murugan ...Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry and take necessary action against the private respondents based on the communication of the 1st respondent in COLREV/5385/2025-C2 dated 18.03.2025 within time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Jeyaram Sidharth For R1 to R3 : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan Additional Government Pleader For R4 : M/s.M.Aasha Government Advocate (Criminal side) For R5, R7 and R8 : Mr.S.A.Ajmalkhan *****
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry and take necessary action against the private respondents based on the communication of the 1st respondent in COLREV/5385/2025-C2 dated 18.03.2025 within time frame fixed by this Court.
2/6
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner is the owner of the land in Survey No.29/2 to an extent of 0.82 Ares and the plot No.109. The contention of the petitioner is that the private respondents are putting up a drama stage in front of the petitioner's house, thereby blocking the petitioner's ingress and egress to the petitioner's house.
3. This Court directed the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 to ascertain whether the drama stage was blocking the petitioner ingress and egress. After spot inspection it is reported that admittedly, a portion of the drama stage is blocking the petitioner's ingress and egress. Further the Learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that he had advised the respondents to remove the same.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 5, 7 and 8 submitted that the said drama stage or any construction was not put up by the President.
5. After hearing the rival submissions, this Court has given its consideration. It is seen that the space before the petitioner's house was used for putting up a drama stage temporarily. Now, there is a proposal to put up permanent stage. Therefore, the petitioner is objecting as stated supra. Therefore, 3/6
the respondents are permanently restrained from putting up any construction obstructing the ingress and egress to the petitioner's house. However, instead of putting up in front of the petitioner's house, the respondents are at liberty to put up the permanent drama stage in Survey No.29 or 82 which is shown as a large open space.
6. The next contention is that the petitioner is occupying more space by putting up fence, putting up construction and planting trees in the place which is not allotted to the petitioner. As far as this issue is concerned, the petitioner is vehemently refuting that there is no encroachment. In order to ascertain it is necessary to survey the land and petitioner's property. Therefore, the official respondents shall issue notice to the petitioner to survey the land. Thereafter, if there is any encroachment, the same shall be removed. 7.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
30.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Tmg 4/6
To
1. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Kenikarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
5/6
S.SRIMATHY , J.
Tmg ORDER MADE IN DATED : 30.07.2025 6/6