A.K.Karuppusamy S/O Kaliappan v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.09.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD W.P(MD)No.19633 of 2018 A.K.Karuppusamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

2.The Commissioner,, Palani Municipality, Dindigul District.

3.Saravana Bhava 4.Kumar 5.Saravanan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents, more particularly the 2nd respondent, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.04.2018 and take action within a time frame.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh 1/5

For 1st Respondent : Mr.N.GA.Nataraj Government Advocate For 2nd Respondent : Mr.L.P.Maurya For Respondents 3 & 4 : No appearance For 5th Respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthil * * *

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents, more particularly the 2nd respondent, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.04.2018 and take action within a time frame.

2.

Heard Mr.D.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.N.GA.Nataraj, learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent and Mr.M.P.Senthil, learned counsel for the 5th respondent.

2/5

3.

Pointing out that on the North of Gounder Itterii Road in Palani, in Town Survey No.7/2D, a layout has been created in the name and style of Sri Velan Nagar and the layout was not at all approved by the 2nd respondent and without getting any building permission from the 2nd respondent constructions are being made causing obstructions in Gounder Itteri Road, the petitioner submitted a representation to respondents 1 and 2 on 06.04.2018 and the same, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is yet to be considered.

4.

Considering the pendency of the representation made by the petitioner with the official respondents, without expressing any opinion on the merits of claim made by the petitioner either in the representation or in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.04.2018, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 5 and any others concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Such an exercise shall be completed within a 3/5

period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

[R.M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.] 19.09.2022 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No sj 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

4/5

R.MAHADEVAN, J.

and J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD , J.

sj W.P(MD)No.19633 of 2018 19.09.2022 5/5