1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)No.11155 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 R.Arjunan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Commissioner of Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chennai-600 005. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Land Reforms, Murugan Kurichi, Tirunelveli. 3. The Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. 4. Abraham ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus forbearing the third respondent from interfering with the petitioner's property till the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner pending before the first respondent. For Petitioner ... Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Anandkumar For Respondents ... Mr.TR.Janarthanam Additional Government Pleader for R.1 to R.3 Dispensed with for R.4 ORDER This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Mandamus to forbear the third respondent from interfering with the petitioner's property till the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner pending before the first respondent. 2. Heard Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.TR.Janarthanam, learned Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. In view of the order that is to be passed, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with. 4. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the third respondent at the behest of the fourth respondent is interfering with the rights of the petitioner in respect of the appeal pending before the first respondent. According to the petitioner, the third respondent is summoning the petitioner orally without any just or reasonable cause and thereby the petitioner is prejudiced. The petitioner has given representation to the Superintendent of Police complaining of the arbitrariness in the action of the third respondent calling upon the petitioner to appear without following the due process of law. 6. In such view of the matter, the Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District though not a party/respondent in the writ petition is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, for appropriate relief as may be necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Consequently the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No Costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1. The Commissioner of Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chennai-600 005. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Land Reforms, Murugan Kurichi, Tirunelveli. 3. The Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.33980) W.P.(MD)No.11155 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 28.09.2011 ssl NSV/28.10.11/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/