1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:01.04.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE K.SUGUNA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.ARUMUGHASWAMY WP(MD)No.3955 of 2011 and MP.No.1 of 2011 Venkatachalapuram Kudiyiruppor Nala Sangam Represented by its Secretary Mr.Radhakrishnan, 26, C.C.Road, Venkatachalapuram, Madurai 11. :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Secretary, Ministry of State Highways, St.George Fort, Chennai. 2.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. 4.The Superintending Engineer, NABARD and Rural Roads Circle,Trichy 20. :Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 2, 3 and 4 not to demolish the residential building in R.S.Nos.109, 101, 102 & 99 in Madakulam Village, Madurai and in the streets of CC Road and BB Road for the construction of over bridge from TVS Nagar railway crossing to Jaihindhpuram via Venkatachalapuram 50 feet road to a length of 360.827 metres. For Petitioner :Mr.R.Ramasamy For Respondents 1,2&4:Mr.R.Janakiramulu, Special Government Pleader. ORDER [Order of the Court was made BY K.SUGUNA, J] This Writ Petition is filed for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 2, 3 and 4 not to demolish the residential building situated in R.S.Nos.109, 101, 102 & 99 in Madakulam Village, Madurai District, Madurai for the construction of over bridge. 2.The case of the petitioner is that the members of the petitioner association are having residential houses in R.S.Nos.109, 101, 102 & 99 in Madakulam Village, Madurai District, Madurai. However, in the said area, the respondents have marked certain places for the construction of over bridge, consequently, this Writ Petition is filed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the above lands belong to the petitioner association and pattas also stand in their favour Besides, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no need for the construction of over bridge in the said area. 4.Though a stand is taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said land is a patta land, no patta is produced before this Court Besides, even assuming that the lands belong to the petitioner, without resorting to the relevant procedures contemplated under the Act and Rules, no property of any private individual can be demolished by the authority concerned. However, in the case on hand, admittedly and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner also, as on date, no notice of any nature is issued. As far as the stand of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no need for the constitution of over bridge in the said area is concerned, it is for the authority concerned to decide the issue and not by any individual, who is residing in the said area. 5.In view of the said fact that there is no notice issued to the petitioner with regard to either acquisition of lands or any other further steps taken by the respondents in this regard, we are of the considered opinion, this Writ Petition is premature. 6.In the result, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed However, if any notice is issued to the petitioner, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Accounts) / TRUE COPY / Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Secretary, Ministry of State Highways, St.George Fort, Chennai. 2.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. 4.The Superintending Engineer, NABARD and Rural Roads Circle, Trichy 20. +1CC to Mr.R.Ramasamy, Advocate. SR.No.12679. +1CC to The Special Government Pleader. SR.no.12537. NB ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD).No.3955 of 2011 RP/14.06.2011/2P/7C. 01.04.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/