Madras High Court
Rameshkumar vs The Estate Officer on 4 July, 2022
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.07.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
Rameshkumar ... Appellant in W.A.No.1446 of 2022
Palanisamy ... Appellant in W.A.No.1447 of 2022
Mariyammal ... Appellant in W.A.No.1448 of 2022
Thulasiraman ... Appellant in W.A.No.1449 of 2022
vs
The Estate Officer,
Southern Railway, Divisional Officer,
Work Branch, Salem District ... Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order dated 06.06.2022 in WP Nos.4057,
4060, 4053, 4055 of 2022.
For the Appellants : Mr.M.Elango
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by
the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The writ appeals have been filed to challenge the order dated
06.06.2002 passed by learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions
filed to challenge the eviction order passed under Section 5(1) of the Public
Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupation) Act, 1971 (hereinafter
Page 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
referred to as ‘the Act of 1971’).
2. It is submitted that in the earlier round of litigation, a Division
Bench of this Court, in WP Nos.23078 of 2021 etc. batch, has caused
interference in the order issued by the Estate Officer, and quashed the
proceedings and directed him to give an opportunity of personal hearing to
the appellants. However, the respondent passed an order of eviction under
Section 5(1) of the Act of 1971, and that too without assigning any reason.
Therefore, the writ appellants have filed writ petitions again, but the same
were dismissed.
3. A copy of the order passed under Section 5(1) of the Act of 1971
was produced to indicate that no reason whatsoever has been given, though
the provision mandates reasons to be recorded for eviction. In view of the
above, learned Single Judge ought to have interfered in the impugned order.
The prayer is accordingly, to set aside the order of learned Single Judge as
well as the order passed under Section 5(1) of the Act of 1971.
4. We have considered the submission made by learned counsel for
the appellants and perused the records. We find that in the earlier round of
Page 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
litigation, the Division Bench vide its order dated 27.10.2021 in
W.P.Nos.23078 of 2021 etc. batch, found that during the course of Covid-
19 pandemic, proper personal hearing was not given to the appellants. The
operative portion of the said judgment in paragraph 9 is quoted hereunder:
“9.In such view of the matter, the order
impugned in these writ petitions are set aside and
the matter is remanded back to the respondent for
fresh consideration. The petitioners are hereby
directed to appear for personal hearing on
15.11.2021 and the respondent after hearing the
case of the petitioners shall pass orders afresh in
accordance with law.”
5. Pursuant to the direction aforesaid, the appellants were provided
with an opportunity of hearing, and finding no document in their favour to
prove the title and the land belonging to the Railways, order for eviction was
issued. A perusal of the order reveals disclosure of the facts necessary for
issuance of the order of eviction. The two reasons assigned for eviction was
that it is Railway land, encroached upon by the appellants, and therefore,
eviction has to be effected, and it is also when the writ appellants failed to
produce document to prove their rightful possession. The appellants rather
sought for providing an alternate accommodation without showing their right
Page 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
for the aforesaid.
6. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to cause
interference in the order of learned Single Judge. The appellants have also
failed to clarify as to why the writ petitions were filed to challenge the order
under Section 5(1) of the Act of 1971, when the remedy of appeal was
available to the writ appellants. In any case, now that the writ petitions
having been decided on merits, the issue aforesaid becomes irrelevant. The
writ appeals fail and the same are dismissed. There will be no order as to
costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.9331, 9332, 9334 and 9346 of 2022 are
closed.
(M.N.B., CJ.) (N.M., J.)
04.07.2022
Index : Yes/No
tar
Page 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
To
The Estate Officer,
Southern Railway,
Divisional Officer,
Work Branch,
Salem District
Page 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
M.N.Bhandari, CJ.
and
N.Mala, J.
(tar)
W.A.Nos.1446 to 1449 of 2022
04.07.2022
Page 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of 6
