Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 2728 (MAD)

S. Chokkalingam v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate - cum - Revenue Divisional Officer

2014-08-19

M.JAICHANDREN, R.MAHADEVAN

body2014
Judgment : R. Mahadevan, J. 1. Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order, dated 03.06.2013, in and by which the petitioners were directed to remove the encroachment made by them. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they had purchased land to an extent of 3276 square feet from one Valliammal @ Enbavalli, by a registered sale deed, dated 17.05.1999 and constructed a dwelling house and they have been residing there. While so, the first respondent, by his proceedings, dated 20.05.2013, had directed the petitioners to remove the wall as well as the gate and further directed them to appear for an enquiry, on 27.05.2013. Accordingly, the petitioners had appeared before the first respondent and sought for time to submit their explanation. Based on the said request, the enquiry was adjourned to 03.06.2013. The petitioners had also appeared before the first respondent, on 03.06.2013. However, the petitioners had been informed by the officials of the first respondent that on 03.06.2013, there would be no enquiry. Thereafter, the impugned order, dated 03.06.2013, had been passed, directing the petitioners to remove the encroachment made by them. In such circumstances, the present Writ Petition has been laid. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that before passing the impugned order, no enquiry had been conducted. Thus, on the sole ground, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader, relying on the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, would make an attempt to sustain the impugned order. 5. We have considered the above submissions and perused the records carefully. 6. Admittedly, before passing the impugned order, no enquiry had been conducted, by affording opportunity to the petitioners. On this ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 03.06.2013, passed by the first respondent, is set aside and the petitioners are directed to appear before the first respondent for enquiry, on 25.08.2014, at 11.00 AM, along with relevant documents. On such appearance, the first respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry, as contemplated under the relevant provisions of the Act, consider the objections of the petitioners, and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks, thereafter. 7. The Writ Petition is allowed, as indicated above. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.