Madras High Court
Mr.R.Vetri vs The District Collector on 21 September, 2021
1 W.P. No.15507 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P. No.15507 of 2021
& W.M.P. Nos.16433 & 16434 of 2021
1.Mr.R.Vetri,
S/o. Mr.Radhakrishnan.
2.Mr.N.Sivaraman,
S/o. Mr.Narayanaswamy.
Rep. by their Power of Attorney Agent,
Mr.K.M.Syed Khalifa. ...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai-600 001.
2.The Corporation of Chennai,
Rep. by its Commissioner,
Ripon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.
...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd
respondent to consider their representations dated 23.02.2018 and
17.07.2020 and to remove the shed, equipment and solid waste
lying in the said property owned by the Petitioners.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2 W.P. No.15507 of 2021
For Petitioners : Mr.Thiageswaran
for Waron and Sirams
For Respondent 1 : Mr.U.Baranidharan,
Government Advocate
For Respondent 2 : Mrs.P.T. Ramadevi
Standing Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus
directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representations made
by the petitioner on 23.02.2018 and 17.07.2020 and to remove the
shed, equipment and solid waste that is lying in the subject
property.
2.The case of the petitioners is that the subject property
measuring an extent of 1.05 acres was purchased by the petitioners
through a registered sale deed dated 06.01.1990. The further case
of the petitioners is that an attempt was made to establish a
'Uzhavar Santhai' in the property and hence the petitioners filed a
Suit in O.S. No.528 of 2000 seeking for the relief of the declaration
and permanent injunction. The Suit was filed as against four
defendants and the District Collector, Chennai District was the 3rd
defendant in this Suit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
3.The above Suit came to be dismissed by a judgment and
decree dated 06.01.2010 by the XIV Assistant Judge, City Civil
Court, Chennai. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed an
appeal in A.S. No.122 of 2011. This appeal was contested by the
defendants/respondents and ultimately, the appeal was allowed by a
judgment and decree dated 03.01.2013 and thereby the judgment
and decree of the Trial Court was set aside and the petitioners were
declared to be the absolute owners of the subject property. There
was also a consequential relief of permanent injunction granted in
favour of the petitioner. It is stated that this decree has become
final and no appeal was filed as against the judgment and decree
passed in the Appeal Suit.
4.The grievance of the petitioner is that the Chennai
Corporation without any authority had put up a shed and started
dumping the solid waste in the property owned by the petitioners.
The petitioners therefore made representations requesting for the
removal of the same. Since the same was not considered, the
present writ petition has been filed before this Court seeking for
appropriate directions.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
5.The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The
relevant portions in the counter affidavit are extracted here under:
7. I respectfully submit that the Government of
India in the year 2014 has formulated a scheme namely
"Swachh Bharat Mission" with an aim to clean up the
streets, roads and infrastructure of India's cities, towns
and rural areas. I further submit that under the said
scheme the Government of India is providing funds for
constructing compost yards for preparing manure from
the biodegradable waste in the limits of Chennai City.
8.I respectfully submit that the Greater Chennai
Corporation is not a party to the First Appeal in
A.S.No.122 of 2011 and the injunction order obtained
by the petitioner herein does not bind the Greater
Chennai Coporation. I further submit that as per the
Revenue Records, the land in question at Block No.40,
T.S. No.32, Old Survey No.138/2, Kolathur Village,
Ayanavaram Taluk is classified as "Anadheenam' and
further there is no Revenue Record available in the
Taluk Office as Survey No.138/2B, Kolathur Village,
Ayanavaram Taluk.
9.I respectfully submit that the Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation has addressed a letter
dated 02.07.2021 to the Collector, Chennai District i.e,
the 1st respondent herein, requesting to award an entry
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
permission to the Greater Chennai Corporation in the
land at Survey No.32, Block No.40, Kolathur Village,
Ayanavaram Taluk for setting up a Micro Compost
Center in the said land.
10.I respectfully submit that the Greater Chennai
Corporation has taken steps to construct a Micro
Composting Centre in the government vacant land in
question in order to reduce the dumping of garbage and
also to safeguard the Government land.
6.Heard Mr.Thiageswaran, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners, Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Government
Advocate appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent and
Mrs.P.T.Ramadevi, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of
the 2nd respondent.
7.The facts that have been discussed Supra makes it clear
that the title of the petitioners have been declared by a competent
civil court and it binds the respondents/defendants. The 2nd
respondent seems to be utilising the property based on the entry
found in the Revenue Records as if the subject property is classified
as "Anadhennam". However the fact remains that the subject
property was found to be the absolute property of the petitioners
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
and this judgment and decree was passed in the appeal after it was
contested by the official defendants. It is also seen from the counter
affidavit that the 2nd respondent has addressed a letter to the 1st
respondent seeking for a permission to enter upon the property for
setting up a Micro Compost Centre in the property.
8.In the considered view of this Court, the 1st respondent
cannot grant any such permission in view of the fact that the District
Collector is bound by the judgment and decree of the competent
civil court. Till this judgment and decree is reversed in the manner
known to law, there is no question of anyone denying the title of
the petitioners. Even the 2nd respondent is attempting to put up a
Micro Compost Centre in the property based on the entries made in
the Revenue Records. The moment a Civil Court renders a decree by
declaring the title to the property, the entry in the Revenue Records
will become irrelevant.
9.In view of the above, the 2nd respondent cannot go forward
and construct any Micro Composting Centre in the property and the
1st respondent cannot grant any such permission. That apart, the
2nd respondent has to necessarily consider the representations
made by the petitioners on 23.02.2018 and 17.07.2020 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
necessary steps must be taken to remove the shed, equipments and
the solid waste that is lying in the property. The 2nd respondent
cannot straight away get into the property belonging to the
petitioners without following the due process of law and such an
interference will violate the constitutional right guaranteed under
Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
10.The decision shall be taken by the 2nd respondent, within
a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order
and effective steps shall be taken to remove the equipments and
the solid waste lying in the property.
11.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.
No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
21.09.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ssr/mka
To
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai-600 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.,
ssr
2.The Corporation of Chennai,
Rep. by its Commissioner,
Ripon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.
W.P. No.15507 of 2021
& W.M.P. Nos.16433 & 16434 of 2021
21.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
