Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 1 docs
Article 226 in The Constitution Of India 1949
Citedby 2 docs
Tamil Nadu State Retired ... vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 25 February, 2008
Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary ... vs Special Secretary To Government on 15 February, 2011

View the actual judgment from court
User Queries
Madras High Court
Tamilnadu Revenue Department ... vs The District Collector on 22 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                              
                      DATED: 22.11.2007
                              
                            CORAM
                              
            THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
                              
                Writ Petition No.4911 of 1999
                              
                              


Tamilnadu Revenue Department Office Assistants Association
Tuticorin District
by its President R.Sudalai
141/A2
Taluk Office Road
Tiruchendur              					..Petitioner
                              
                              
         Vs.


1. The District Collector,
   Tuticorin District
   Tuticorin.

2. The District Revenue Officer
   Tuticorin District
   Tuticorin.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
   Tiruchendur
   Tuticorin District.

4. The Tahsildar
   Tiruchendur Taluk
   Tiruchendur.                					..Respondents




      This  writ petition is filed under Article 226 of  the

Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ  of

Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first

respondent  in  Na.Ka.No.E3.64377/98, dated  24.12.1998  and

quash  the same and further direct the respondents  to  hand

over the vacant physical possession of the enjoyment of  the

land  and  building bearing door Nos.141-A2 and  141-A3  and

bearing   survey   No.223/2,   Kela   Tiruchendur   Village,

Tiruchendur Taluk to the petitioner's association.



               For petitioner  : Mr.M.Aniruthan

               For respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan, Government Advocate



                                                            
                          O R D E R

Heard Mr.M.Aniruthan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the cancellation of the allotment of 5 cents of vacant land in survey No.223/2, Kela Tiruchendur Village made in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is an Association consisting of employees of the Revenue Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu.

3. The main contention of the petitioner is that the land in question was allotted to the petitioner Association for running a canteen and a job typing office, without any precondition. However, the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent stating that the conditions of allotment had not been complied with and that the land was used by the petitioner for other purposes.

4. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the land allotted to the petitioner Association had been occupied unauthorisedly and since the Tahsildar, Tiruchendur, had initiated action to resume the land and building, as directed by the Collector, Thoothukkudi, the unauthorised occupants had vacated the building and the land, on 4.3.1999.

5. From the records available before this Court it is seen that at the time of the admission of the writ petition no interim order had been passed by this Court.

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the land had not been re-allotted to any other person or Association till date. It is also submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the fourth respondent for allotment of the said land in question to the petitioner Association.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the fourth respondent. On such representation being made, the fourth respondent is expected to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, expeditiously.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

To

1. The District Collector Tuticorin District Tuticorin.

2. The District Revenue Officer Tuticorin District Tuticorin.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Tiruchendur Tuticorin District.

4. The Tahsildar Tiruchendur Taluk Tiruchendur.