VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

Chandrasekaran .T v. The District Collector

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
17 May 2023
Bench
The Acting Chief Justice, S Justice L.Victoria Gowri
Case no.
WP(MD) 12174/2023

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)

Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, S/o.Thangaraj, a resident of Parivallikottai, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, has come to this Court questioning the issuance of the impugned notice dated

08.05.2023 wherein the petitioner has been called upon to remove the encroachment to an extent of 0.00.09 hectares put up in 'Nilaviyal Pathai' running in the land covered in S.No.50/3A situated at Parivallikottai, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, by developing a garden.

¶2The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assailing the impugned proceedings, submitted that the petitioner has not been provided with any opportunity.

¶3It is seen that earlier, one L.Jeyachandran filed a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.9905 of 2023, for removal of encroachment made by the petitioner herein in S.No.50/3B, in accordance with the eviction notice issued by Tahsildar, Ottapidaram, Thoothukudi District, dated 28.10.2022. This Court has noticed that the writ petitioner herein namely Chandrasekaran was issued with the notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, by the Tahsildar, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, showing that the land in S.No.50/3B of Parivallikottai, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, to an extent of 0.01.0 hectares is classified as 'Nilaviyal Pathai' and the nature of encroachment to an extent of

0.00.09 hectares is garden. Therefore, this Court vide order dated

25.04.2023, directed the Tahsildar, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, to remove the encroachment made by the petitioner herein. Although the petitioner is an encroacher, again when a notice was issued to him, having no regards towards the civil Rules, he has once again come to this Court.

¶4We are unable to find any justification or merit in the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (T.R., ACJ.) (L.V.G., J.)

17.05.2023 Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No To

1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

2.The Tahsildar, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District. T.RAJA, ACJ. and

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J. PM

17.05.2023

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:17.05.2023 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and W.M.P(MD)Nos.10413 and 10414 of 2023 T.Chandrasekaran ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. 2.The Tahsildar, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned eviction notice of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.A3/4541/2022 dated 08.05.2023, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the second respondent not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession of the land in S.No.50/3A situated at Parivallikottai, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District. For Petitioner :Mr.M.Prabu For Respondents :Mr.S.P.Maharajan, Special Government Pleader

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.