Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1137 (MAD)

L. Rathina Reddy v. Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. By its Secretary, Revenue Department, Chennai

2012-03-01

M.Y.EQBAL, T.S.SIVAGNANAM

body2012
Judgment :- CHIEF JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL & T.S. SIVAGNANAM 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and perused the impugned notice purported to be issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 calling upon the petitioner to remove the buildings or super structures, failing which action will be taken to remove the same. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the property in question is the ancestral property of the petitioner, and he is paying property tax for the same. Further, before issuing the impugned notice on the petitioner under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, no notice was issued to him under Section 7 of the Act, which is a mandatory requirement. 3. Without entering into the merits of the contention raised by the petitioner, we dispose of this writ petition by directing the petitioner to file show cause within three weeks from today, treating the impugned notice as the show cause notice. On receipt of the show cause, the third respondent shall inquire into the matter, consider the show cause and pass a reasoned order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till the final orders are passed by the authority concerned, no coercive steps shall be taken. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petition is closed.