Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.33 seconds)
Documents citing G.Radhakrishnan vs The President on 30 October, 2007

Ganapathi vs The Tahsildar on 23 September, 2020

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in response to the said notice, the addressees namely, Shanmugaraj, Chellappa and Ganapathy had submitted their response dated 08.09.2020 and apprehending that the second respondent is going to invoke Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, 1994, they sought that reasonable opportunity of personal hearing ought to have been provided to the said persons and then, appropriate orders shall be passed and till such time, shall forbear the second respondent from proceeding further in view of the impugned proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioner in respect of his submissions, has also placed reliance on the judgment in G.Radhakrishnan vs. The President, Edayakottai [(2008) 1 MLJ 1132]. It is relevant to extract paragraph No.25 of the said order hereunder:-
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

K.Amalraj vs The District Collector on 11 July, 2023

9. The prime ground of attack is that the Panchayat President lacks the jurisdiction to initiate the impugned proceedings. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners drew my attention to Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act and contended that at best the Panchayat President can https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/12 W.P(MD)Nos.16949 to 16951 of 2014 only issue notice calling upon the alleged encroacher to remove the encroachment. He cannot enforce his order. It is only the revenue authority who will have to cause physical removal of the encroachment. He relied on a catena of decisions in this regard, in particular, 2008 1 MLJ 1132 (G.Radhakrishnan vs. The President, Keayakottai Panchayat).
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - G R Swaminathan - Full Document

S.A.Karnan vs The District Collector on 5 August, 2016

11. The judgment in G.Radhakrishnan's case would not help the petitioners to contend that the executive authority of the Village is not empowered to evict the encroachers. Sub-Section (2) of Section 131 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, empowers the executive authority of the Village to evict the encroachers. There is an option given to the executive authority to approach the revenue authority, in case they are not in a position to clear the encroachment. However, that does not mean that the executive authority of the Village is helpless in the matter of eviction. We are, therefore, of the view that there is no merit in the contention taken by the learned Senior Counsel with respect to the power of the Village Panchayat to evict the encroachers.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1