Madras High Court
M.C.Thamilvalavan vs The District Collector on 13 March, 2024
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
2024:MHC:1439
W.P.No.34265 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.03.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.P.No.34265 of 2017
and
W.M.P.No.38147 of 2017
M.C.Thamilvalavan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.Revenue Divisional Officer,
Thiruvallur (Sub Division),
Thiruvallur.
3.Thasildar,
Thiruvallur Taluk Office,
Thiruvallur.
4.The General Manager,
Caterpillar Pvt. Ltd.,
Manavala Nagar,
Mel Nallathur Village & Post,
Thiruvallur District. ... Respondents
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.34265 of 2017
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to consider the petitioner's representation
dated 03.07.2017 submitted to the respondents and remove the compound
wall constructed by the 4th respondent and recover the Government land
(Parayan Kuttai) in Survey No.43/5 and permit all the villages and the cattle
to use the pond and to direct the 4th respondent to restore the pond to its
original state which was closed by the 4th respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arokia Maniraj
For R1 to R3 : Mr.A.Selvendran
Special Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.M.S.Krishnan
Senior Advocate
For Mr.K.Gowtham Kumar
: Ms.S.Varsha
Advocate Commissioner
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 03.07.2017 for evicting the 4th respondent from the subject property more Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.34265 of 2017 fully described in the present writ petition.
2. Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the authorities conducted a field inspection, verified the revenue records and found that there is no encroachment.
3. The learned Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court also submitted a report stating that there are no encroachments.
4. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner disputed the said statement by the learned Special Government Pleader and the report submitted by the learned Advocate Commissioner.
5. Such disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If at all the petitioner claims right of civil nature, he has to approach the Competent Civil Court of Law for the purpose of crystallizing his civil rights based on documents and evidences available on record. However, High Court in writ proceedings, in the absence Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.34265 of 2017 of any record to establish that there are encroachments cannot issue a direction to remove the same.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [K.R.S., J.]
13.03.2024
Jeni
Index : Yes
Speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes
To
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvallur (Sub Division), Thiruvallur.
3.The Thasildar, Thiruvallur Taluk Office, Thiruvallur.
Page 4 of 5https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.34265 of 2017 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and K.RAJASEKAR, J.
Jeni W.P.No.34265 of 2017 13.03.2024 Page 5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis