Madras High Court
R.Vimal Rajkumar vs The Executive Chairman on 6 September, 2022
W.P.No.23419/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P.No.23419/2022
R.Vimal Rajkumar ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Executive Chairman,
Naduvattam Town Panchayat,
Nilgiris District.
2. Assistant Conservator of Forests,
Forest Protection Squad,
Udhagai-1, Nilgiris. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents
to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.07.2022 not to
disturb the petitioner's peaceful possession.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.D.Selvaraj
For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash,
Government Advocate for R1
Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar,
Special Government Pleader for R2
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23419/2022
(Order of the Court was made by T.RAJA, J.)
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 27.07.2022 not to disturb his peaceful
possession.
2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the petitioner along with his family members are in possession of
the lands comprised in Survey No.227/1, 169 bearing Door No.18/97-
A & 18/97-B in T.R.Bazaar, Naduvattam Town in Nilgiris District for
more than 45 years and the said lands are also classified as 'Grama
Natham'. The petitioner's father also obtained approval for
construction in the said site on 02.06.1989 from the 1st respondent.
That apart, the petitioner's father also obtained licence for running
carrot farming in the said site from the concerned authorities on
27.02.1998 which has been periodically renewed after payment of the
necessary taxes to the Government. More than that, the Local
Authorities have also issued Ration Card, Electricity Connection in the
name of the petitioner's father and the Water Tax and Occupational
Tax are being paid to the Government periodically without fail.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23419/2022
that in the meanwhile, one A.Sathyaraj tried to encroach the
petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment in the property-in-
question. Therefore, a Civil Suit in O.S.No.75/2011 was filed before
the Principal District Munsi, Gudalur seeking permanent injunction and
the learned trial court by an order dated 24.03.2014 granted
permanent injunction in favour of the petitioner herein. However,
being aggrieved by the said order, the said A.Sathyaraj preferred an
appeal in A.S.No.12/2017 before the learned Subordinate Judge,
Gudalur and the same was dismissed by judgment dated 05.12.2017.
However, the 1st respondent herein, joining hands with the said
Mr.A.Sathyara, has issued a notice dated 09.10.2017 followed by a
final notice dated 28.02.2018 thereby trying to evict the petitioner
from the building-in-question. Therefore, the petitioner has given a
representation dated 05.07.2020 to the 1st respondent. Since there is
no response for the same, he has been advised to approach this Court
by filing the present Writ Petition.
4. Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Advocate takes
notice for 1st respondent and Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar, learned Special
Government Pleader takes notice for 2nd respondent.
5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23419/2022
respondent urging this Court to dismiss the Writ Petition further
drawing our notice to paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed in support of
the writ petition stated that when the petitioner himself has admitted
his case that the 1st respondent has demolished the building-in-
question on 03.10.2020 for the reason that it was unauthorizedly put
up, he has no right to approach this Court with a prayer to consider his
representation dated 05.07.2020.
6. We are also able to find some merits on the submissions of
the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd
respondent. The reason being that when the petitioner himself has
admitted in paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ
petition that during the pendency of his representation dated
05.07.2020 which was given after the notice dated 28.02.2018, the 1st
respondent has demolished the building-in-question on 03.10.2020 as
it is an unauthorized one, the writ petition ought not to have been
filed. Therefore, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed as the
prayer in the writ petition has already become infructuous.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23419/2022
7. In the result, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed. No costs.
(T.R.J.,) (P.D.A.J.,)
06.09.2022
tsi
To
1. The Executive Chairman,
Naduvattam Town Panchayat,
Nilgiris District.
2. Assistant Conservator of Forests,
Forest Protection Squad,
Udhagai-1, Nilgiris.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23419/2022
T.RAJA, J.
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
tsi
W.P.No.23419 of 2022
06.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
