Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

S Sultana vs The Commissioner Chennai City Municipal Corporation Rippon Building Chennai 600 003 And Others

Madras High Court|16 February, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.02.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.3821 of 2017 S.Sultana .. Petitioner Vs.
1. The Commissioner Chennai City Municipal Corporation Rippon Building Chennai - 600 003.
2. The District Collector NH 205, India, Thiruvallur Tamil Nadu - 602 001.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ambattur.
4. The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the petitioner's superstructure in door numbers 34A/13A Kavitha Street, Park Road, U.R.Nagar, Padi, S.No.15, Block No.63, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvellore District without following the procedure and guidelines issued by the State Government in G.O.(Ms).No.540, Revenue (LD6(2)) Department, dated 04.12.2014.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghupathi For Respondents : Mr.A.Nagarajan for 1st respondent Mr.M.K.Subramanian Government Pleader for respondents 2 to 4 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Huluvadi G.Ramesh,J.) The learned Government Pleader has produced before us the site plan of the area showing the water canal and the encroachments removed. It is stated that though the petitioner has patta land, she also encroached on water canal, for which initially notice was issued under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 on 12.1.2017, and since the petitioner refused to receive the same, the same was pasted, following which notice dated 30.1.2017 under Section 6 of the said Act was issued, which was also pasted.
2. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has not received any notices and, thus, she had no opportunity to put forth her case.
3. In order to avoid further controversy on the issue of receipt of notices, copies of Section 7 and Section 6 notices have been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner may file their reply to Section 7 notice on or before 6.3.2017 and on consideration of the reply, it would be decided whether notice under Section 6 of the said Act should be issued or not. The notice issued under Section 6 of the said Act dated 30.1.2017 is, thus, quashed.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, W.M.P.No.3891 of 2017 is closed.
Index : No Internet : Yes sasi To:
1. The Commissioner Chennai City Municipal Corporation Rippon Building Chennai - 600 003.
2. The District Collector NH 205, India, Thiruvallur Tamil Nadu - 602 001.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ambattur.
4. The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk.
(H.G.R., J.) (R.M.D., J.) 16.02.2017 HULUVADI G.RAMESH,J.
AND R.MAHADEVAN,J.
(sasi) W.P.No.3821 of 2017 16.02.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

S Sultana vs The Commissioner Chennai City Municipal Corporation Rippon Building Chennai 600 003 And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
16 February, 2017
Judges
  • Huluvadi G Ramesh
  • R Mahadevan