Sigamani v. The District Collector

ORDER [made by M.SUNDAR, J.] Ms. M. Ellakkiya, learned counsel representing Ms. Vijayalakshmi K. Rajaratnam, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, Mr.M.S.Arasakumar, learned Government Advocate for RR 1 to 4 (official respondents) and Mr. N. Manokaran, learned counsel for RR 5 and 6 (private respondents) are before this Court.

¶2Writ petitioner, along with her neighbours, viz., Kamakshi and Ammasai, sent a representation dated 01.07.2021 alleging encroachment by private respondents (RR 5 and 6) in S.Nos.339/1 and 339/10, Kanakkampalayam Village, Gobichettipalayam Taluk, Erode District (hereinafter 'said land' for the sake of convenience and clarity). This representation was sent inter alia to R2 and R2 sent a Page Nos.2/6 communication dated 30.07.2021 bearing reference X/K:/16675-2021-C2 to R4 and a scanned reproduction of this communication is as follows: To be noted, a copy of this communication has been marked to the writ petitioner. Page Nos.3/6

¶3Captioned WP is predicated on the aforesaid communication dated 30.07.2021 bearing reference X/K:/16675-2021-C2 and it seeks to mandamus R4 to comply with the direction issued by R2, within a time frame.

¶4Notice was issued and all the respondents are represented by counsel, details of which have been alluded to supra.

¶5R4 has filed a counter affidavit dated 22.08.2023 and paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit reads as follows: Page Nos.4/6

¶6In the light of paragraph 8 of counter affidavit, supra, this Court is of the considered view that writ petitioner as well as RR 5 and 6 should seek remedy only in Civil Court, if so advised and so desired.

¶7If the writ petitioner, RR 5, 6 and/or any other party approach the Civil Court with regard to said land, the Civil Court shall consider the suit i.e., conduct trial of the suit on its own merits and in accordance with law untrammelled by closure of the captioned WP as we are not expressing any view or opinion one way or the other about alleged encroachment. Though obvious, we make it clear that all questions are left open to be considered by the Civil Court, if approached.

¶8Captioned WP stands disposed of in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S., J.) (K.G.T., J.)

25.03.2025 cad Index : NC : Page Nos.5/6

M.SUNDAR, J. and

K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J. cad To:

¶1The District Collector Collectorate Palayapalayam Erode 638 011

¶2The District Revenue Officer Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452

¶3The Revenue Divisional Officer Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452

¶4The Tahsildar Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452

25.03.2025 Page Nos.6/6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 25.03.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.P.No.26312 of 2021 Sigamani Petitioner vs. 1. The District Collector Collectorate Palayapalayam Erode 638 011 2. The District Revenue Officer Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452 4. The Tahsildar Gobichettipalayam Erode 638 452 5. K. Raghuram 6. Sivanandavel Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the fourth respondent to comply with the direction issued by the second respondent vide its Page Nos.1/6 proceedings No.O.Mu.16675/2021/02 dated 30.07.2021 within a time frame. For petitioner Ms. M. Elakkiya for Ms. Vijayalakshmi K.Rajaratnam For RR 1 – 4 Mr. M.S. Arasakumar Government Advocate For RR 5 & 6 Mr. N. Manokaran