J.Chengalvarayan. Vs. the Block Development Officer

J.Chengalvarayan. vs The Block Development Officer

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 05, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/928570

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/928570
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: R.Sudhakar, J.
Decided On: Jul 05, 2012
Case Number: Writ Petition No.17023 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012
Subject: Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Constitution

Key legal issue: Constitution
Acts & sections: Constitution of India - Articles 226

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

J.Chengalvarayan.

Advocate Mr.A.Palaniappan, Adv

Respondent

The Block Development Officer

Advocate Ms.V.M.Velumani, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Constitution of India - Articles 226

Excerpt

.....in survey nos.51/7 and no.51/8, karuppoor village, tindivanam taluk, villipuram district under the guise of laying the street road into the property of the petitioner and consequently restrain the respondents from any manner laying any road or act in furtherance of laying road through the property of the petitioner without initiating legal proceedings for acquisition of the respective property in the manner known to law.order1. this writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents from any manner interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner land comprised in survey nos.51/7 and no.51/8, karuppoor village, tindivanam taluk, villipuram district under the guise of laying the street road into the property of the petitioner and consequently restrain the respondents from any manner laying any road or act in furtherance of laying road through the property of the petitioner without initiating legal proceedings for acquisition of the respective property in the manner known to law.2. ms.v.m.velumani, learned special government pleader takes notice for the respondents. by consent, the writ petition is taken up for disposal.3. the grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent is attempting to lay a road in patta land without following due process of law and in high handed manner. a legal notice was issued to the respondents 1 and 3. the counsel has forgotten to put the date either in the first page of the notice or below the signature. the date, however, is found in the postal acknowledgment card. it is desirable that the date is put in the document for proper appreciation by the court as well as by the authority.4. the special government pleader states that the notice has been received by the first respondent and the authority will proceed in the matter by following due process of law.5. recording the submission made by the learned special government pleader, the first respondent is directed to.....

Full Judgment

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 from any manner interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner land comprised in Survey Nos.51/7 and No.51/8, Karuppoor Village, Tindivanam Taluk, Villipuram District under the guise of laying the street road into the property of the petitioner and consequently restrain the respondents from any manner laying any road or act in furtherance of laying road through the property of the petitioner without initiating legal proceedings for acquisition of the respective property in the manner known to law.

ORDER

1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from any manner interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner land comprised in Survey Nos.51/7 and No.51/8, Karuppoor Village, Tindivanam Taluk, Villipuram District under the guise of laying the street road into the property of the petitioner and consequently restrain the respondents from any manner laying any road or act in furtherance of laying road through the property of the petitioner without initiating legal proceedings for acquisition of the respective property in the manner known to law.

2. Ms.V.M.Velumani, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for disposal.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent is attempting to lay a road in patta land without following due process of law and in high handed manner. A legal notice was issued to the respondents 1 and 3. The counsel has forgotten to put the date either in the first page of the notice or below the signature. The date, however, is found in the postal acknowledgment card. It is desirable that the date is put in the document for proper appreciation by the court as well as by the authority.

4. The Special Government Pleader states that the notice has been received by the first respondent and the authority will proceed in the matter by following due process of law.

5. Recording the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader, the first respondent is directed to consider the above legal notice on its own merits and in accordance with law forthwith. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the claim of the petitioner.

6. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties J.Chengalvarayan. vs The Block Development Officer Same Subject Constitution Same Judge R.Sudhakar, J. Acts & Sections Constitution of India - Articles 226