Gayathri.M v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.12.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN W.P(MD) No.28463 of 2023 M.Gayathri ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The District Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Watrap, Virudhunagar District.

5.The Tahsildar, Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

6.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

7.M.Ranjith ... Respondents 1/4

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 2 and 6 to give adequate police protection to survey the land in Survey No.1212/3 situated at Sethunarayanapuram Village, Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District to removing the electricity pole as well as to stop the illegal construction made by the 7th respondent based on the representation dated 05.10.2023.

For Petitioner :Mr.P.Ranjith Kumar For R1 to R6 :Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Addl.Public Prosecutor (Crl.side)

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 2 and 6 to give adequate police protection to survey the land in Survey No.1212/3 situated at Sethunarayanapuram Village, Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District to removing the electricity pole as well as to stop the illegal construction made by the 7th respondent based on the representation dated 05.10.2023.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a complaint was given by the petitioner against the Electricity Board officials stating that they have put up a served connection pole in front of his land. 2/4

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that enquiry was conducted on the complaint of the petitioner and during the course of enquiry, both side appeared. The seventh respondent herein has also gave a statement that they will not make any trouble either to the petitioner or to the electricity Board officials. But the petitioner refused to give any statement. Because of the non co-operation on the side of the petitioner, the petitioner's representation was closed by the second respondent.

4. In view of the above submission, this Court is of the view that this petition is filed seeking for police protection, is clearly abuse of process of the Court. Since the petitioner has not cooperated for the enquiry, the second respondent has completed the process of enquiry. This petition absolutely cannot be entertained by this Court.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 04.12.2023 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No pnn 3/4

G.ILANGOVAN, J.

pnn To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The District Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Watrap, Virudhunagar District.

5.The Tahsildar, Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District. 6.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 7.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Order made in Dated 04.12.2023 4/4