Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1882 (MAD)

A. Settu v. District Collector, Salem District

2012-04-12

R.SUDHAKAR

body2012
Judgment :- 1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering into the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property in S.No.10/6E, at Karattur, Manathaal Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, without following due process of law under the Land Acquisition Act. 2. Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5. In view of the nature of order to be passed, the notice to the respondents 6 and 7 is disposed with. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. The issue raised by the petitioner is that the respondents 1 to 6 are interfering with his property for construction of a school by the seventh respondent. Petitioner has caused legal notice on 15.9.2011 to the respondents 1, 3 and 4. The District Educational Officer (in charge), Sangagiri forwarded the said legal notice to the fifth respondent District Elementary Educational Officer asking him to look into the matter. Thereafter, petitioner has given a representation dated 19.12.2011 to the first respondent and others. Since no reply has been received, the present writ petition has been filed for the above stated relief. 4. There is no material placed by the petitioner to show that the seventh respondent is illegally or unauthorisedly constructing any building in the petitioner's property. Since the petitioner has already caused a legal notice and has given a representation as stated above, this Court is not inclined to issue notice to the respondents 6 and 7 to gather information on the basis of mere allegation made by the petitioner. In such view of the matter, the respondents 1 and 5 are directed to consider the legal notice and the representation given by the petitioner as above on its own merits and in accordance with law forthwith. If there is any dispute with regard to the petitioner's property, it is open to the petitioner to approach the competent civil court for appropriate relief. 5. This writ petition stands disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.