Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.I.Arockiasamy, learned Government Advocate accepting notice on behalf of the respondent/contemnor.
2 It is represented by the learned Government Advocate that since the superstructure put up by the petitioner in S.No.169/3, at Surampatti village, is classified as a Road [Cart track], the request made by the petitioner cannot be considered and as and when suitable lands are available, the petitioner's claim will be considered. He has also produced the communications sent by the respondent / contemnor to the District Collector, Erode District dated 13.06.2016 and 02.11.2016 in Ref.No.6223/2016/A1. The same is taken on file and recorded.
3 In response to the said submission, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has also submitted a representation dated 17.10.2016 to the Tahsildar, Erode, pointing out that in respect of the lands of similar classification, pattas have been granted. However, the petitioner has failed to give any proof as to the submission of the said representation to the Tahsildar, Erode, as neither postal receipt nor acknowledgment is made available.
4 The petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh representation to the Tahsildar, Erode, along with a copy of his earlier representation dated 17.10.2016 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon receipt of the same, the said official is directed to consider the said representation in accordance with law and pass orders within a further period of three weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court did not go into the merits of the representation submitted by the petitioner and it is for the said official to consider and dispose of the representation to be submitted by the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with law.
5 The contempt petition is closed subject to the above observation.