1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 31.10.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Petition (MD) No.12338 of 2011 Muniyandi ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Tahsildar, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Muthuramalingapuram, Virudhunagar District. 4.Pandi ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, to direct the first and second respondents to remove the encroachment in the property situated in Survey No.138/30, Kurunaikulam Village, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District, in view of the petitioner's representation dated 01.08.2010 within a stipulated time. For petitioner .. Mr.G.Marimuthu For respondents 1 & 2 .. Mr.S.Chandrasekaran, Government Advocate For 3rd respondent .. Mr.Johny Basha ORDER (Order of the Court was made by K.N.BASHA, J.) The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for the relief of a direction to the first and second respondents to remove the encroachment made by the fourth respondent in Survey No.138/30, Kurunaikulam Village, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by considering his representation, dated 01.08.2010. 2.By mutual consent of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.S.Chandrasekaran, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and Mr.Johny Basha, learned standing counsel appearing for the third respondent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing, at the admission stage itself. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that inspite of a representation given by the petitioner, dated 01.08.2010, for removal of encroachment caused by the fourth respondent herein, the respondents 1 to 3 have not taken any steps and as such the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court with the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and the learned standing counsel appearing for the third respondent, on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5.Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner herein, we are of the considered view that notice need not be ordered to the fourth respondent herein as his interest also would be protected by giving a direction to the authority to consider the representation of the petitioner by affording opportunity to the petitioner as well as to the fourth respondent. 6.In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner herein, this Court, without going into the merits of the representation of the petitioner dated 01.08.2010 and without expressing any view on the said representation, constrained to direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 01.08.2010 by affording opportunity to the petitioner as well as to the fourth respondent herein and other relevant parties, and to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall also furnish a fresh copy of the representation, dated 01.08.2010, along with the order copy of this Court to the respondents, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) / True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Tahsildar, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Junior Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Muthuramalingapuram, Virudhunagar District. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.37366 Gcg SR : 09.11.2011 : 2p/5c Order in W.P.(MD)No.12338 of 2011 31.10.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/