1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :: 14.07.2010 CORAM :: THE HONOURABLE MR. M. YUSUF EQBAL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JEYAPAUL Writ Appeal(MD)No.397 of 2010 and M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2010 against WP(MD)No.12337/2008 Durairaj, S/o. Late Srinivasan, Melakalkandar Kottai, Annamalai Street, Tiruchy - 11. ... Appellant/3rd Party – Vs - 1. R. Jayaraman, S/o. Late Ramasamy, No.5/222, North Street, Tiruvalarchipatti, Airport, Trichy - 7. .. 1st Respondent/Petitioner 2. The District Collector, Trichy, Trichy District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy Division, Trichy District. 4. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Trichy - 2. .. Respondents 2 to 4/Respondents 1 to 3 Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying the Court to set aside the order dated 30.12.2008 made in W.P.(MD) No.12337 of 2008. Prayer in W.P.No.12337 of 2008: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 16.12.2008 preferred by the petitioner within the period that my be stipulated. For Appellant : Mr.G. R. Swaminathan For 1st Respondent : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, For R2 to R4 : Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was made by THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) The appellant herein, who is not a party to the writ petition, has filed this Writ Appeal with a grievance that the impugned order dated 30.12.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.12337 of 2008 will affect his right. 2. From a perusal of the order, it appears that the writ petitioner / Jayaraman sought for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider his representation dated 16.12.2008 within the period that may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. Alleging inter-alia that his land in question will be interfered with by the villagers in the matter of draining existing water, the writ petitioner has made the representation. 3. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a simple direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner. No effective order, declaring the right of the writ petitioner has been passed, which will affect the right of any of the person, including the present Appellant. If the appellant has any apprehension of his right being affected, he is at liberty to file a representation before the District Collector / Second Respondent. We do not find any merit in this Writ Appeal. 4. Hence, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected M.P.(MD) No.3 of 2010 is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1. The District Collector, Trichy, Trichy District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy Division, Trichy District. 3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Trichy - 2. dpn ssk/29.07.2010 /4c-2p/- Writ Appeal (MD)No.397 of 2010 and M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2010 14.07.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/