The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking to quash the proceedings of the 2nd respondent issued in Na.Ka.No. 521/2010 dated 24.01.2011 and the consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka. No. UMIPO/E.V/N/ Uthukuili/Ko.Kattu/ No. 224/2011 dated 03.02.2011.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the subject property was in possession of the petitioner's father-in-law for several years and later he gifted the property to the petitioner's daughters, by executing a Will. After the death of petitioner's father-in-law, since some rival parties disturbed the possession of the petitioner, he filed a suit in O.S. No.145 of 2008 on the file of District Munsif Court, Perundurai seeking for a relief of declaration and injunction. The rival parties also filed a suit in O.S. No. 251 of 2008 before the said Court seeking for bare injunction. Pending the suits, the 2nd respondent, by his proceedings No. Na.Ka.521/2010 dated 24.01.2011 cancelled the house tax No.3277 of the petitioner, without any notice. Based on the said order, the 3rd respondent issued a notice dated 03.02.2011 stating that the electricity connection of the building will be disconnected, if the petitioner fails to produce the title deed. Aggrieved by the same order, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner.
3. According to the petitioner, the order passed by the 2nd respondent is violative of principles of natural justice, since no notice has been issued and the petitioner has been denied with an opportunity of hearing. Hence, the petitioner was unable to put forth any material, favouring him and therefore, on this score itself, the order passed by the 2nd respondent and the consequential order issued by the 3rd respondent is liable to be quashed.
4. Learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that there is a dispute with regard to the subject property, between the petitioner as well as private respondents 4 to 6 and the same is pending before the Civil Court. In the event of the matter being remitted back to the authorities, an opportunity would be given to the parties concerned to put forth their contentions.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent issued in Na.Ka.No. 521/2010 dated 24.01.2011 and the consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka. No. UMIPO/E.V/N/ Uthukuili/Ko.Kattu/ No. 224/2011 dated 03.02.2011. However, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh, after providing an opportunity to the parties concerned.
7. The Writ Petition is allowed, with the above direction. Consequently, the connected M.Ps are closed. No costs.
14.02.2017 Index: Yes/ No avr To
1. The District Collector Erode District, Erode.
2. The Executive Officer Uthukuli Town Panchayat Perundurai Taluk Erode District.
3. The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Uthukuli, Perundurai Taluk Erode District.
D. KRISHNAKUMAR J.
avr W.P. No. 3440 of 2011 and M.P. Nos. 1 & 2 of 2011 14.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in