Karuppaiah v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Karuppaiah ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Kalaiyarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to remove the jungle of Karuvela Trees in Natham vacant land in Survey Nos.449/7, 449/8, 450/14, 451/39 situated at Oothikulam Village, Vaniyangudi Revenue Village, Kalaiyarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District, as per letter of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka. A1/5274/2023 dated 16.06.2023 within a time frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramu For Respondents : Mr.P.Thilakkumar Government Pleader

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.) The prayer in this writ petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to remove the jungle of Karuvela Trees in Natham vacant land in Survey Nos.449/7, 449/8, 450/14 and 451/39 situated at Oothikulam Village, Vaniyangudi Revenue Village, Kalaiyarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District, as per the letter of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.A1/5274/2023 dated 16.06.2023 within a time frame.

2.

Though the petitioner sought for the abovesaid prayer, today, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is suffice if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and dispose of his representation dated 29.05.2023 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 2/5

3.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 29.05.2023 would be considered by the concerned respondent and appropriate orders would be passed on its own merits within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

4.

Heard both sides.

5.

Since there is a considerable lapse of time after the earlier representation was made, the petitioner herein is granted liberty to give a fresh representation to the concerned respondent, ventilating his grievances, as expeditiously as possible. On receipt of such a representation, the concerned respondent is directed to consider the same, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as to any other person, who may be interested in the subject matter, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with 3/5

regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same, on its own merits. 6.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

[J.N.B, J.] [S.S.Y, J.] 12.03.2025 Index : Yes / No bala To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Kalaiyarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.

4/5

J.NISHA BANU, J.

AND S.SRIMATHY, J.

bala ORDER MADE IN DATED : 12.03.2025 5/5