1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.07.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.S.JANARTHANA RAJA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH Writ Petition(MD)No.7544 of 2011 S.Manian .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Madurai. 2.The Superintending Engineer, Periyar Vaigai Division, 2nd Division, P.W.D., Madurai. 3.The Assistant Engineer, Periyar Vaigai Division, WRO, 1st Division, PWD, Madurai-2. 4.The Tahshildhar, Vadipatti, Madurai. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the notice issued by the third respondent on 17.06.2011 and quash the same and forbear the respondents from evicting the petitioner from his respective lands comprised in Survey No.345 at Kallanai Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramasamy For Respondents : Mr.K.Mahendran, Special Govt.Pleader O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by P.P.S.JANARTHANA RAJA, J.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition to call for the entire records pertaining to the notice issued by the third respondent on 17.06.2011 and quash the same and forbear the respondents from evicting the petitioner from his respective lands comprised in Survey No.345 at Kallanai Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District. 2.The brief facts arising out of this writ petition are as under:- The petitioner and his father were in occupation and continuous possession and enjoyment of 1.5 acres of nanja land comprised in Survey No.345 of Kallanai Village. The land is situated on the outer bank of the southern boundary of one village tank called Kesavaneri Kulam and this land is not situated in the water stagnated area. The said land is comprising about three sides by patta lands and the fourth side is the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 tank's outer bank. But the Revenue Records classified this land as tank poramboke. Subsequently, the third respondent also called for an enquiry under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Encroachment Act, 1905 and the petitioner also attended the enquiry and explained the details relating to this land. Subsequently, the third respondent, issued a notice dated 17.06.2011 directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment from the land, within 21 days from the date of receipt of the notice, otherwise, the petitioner will be evicted from the land. Challenging the above notice, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned notice issued by the third respondent is wrong, illegal and without any basis and justification. It is also further contended that the petitioner's land is not inside the Kesavaneri Kulam and it is situated outside to that, and hence it will not in any way affect the water stagnation in the tank. Therefore, evicting the petitioner is unlawful and that the respondents cannot disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner from his land situated in S.No.345 of Kallanai Village. Therefore, the initiation of action by the third respondent is wrong, illegal and without any basis and justification. 4.Mr.K.Mahendran, learned Special Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of the respondents and submitted that the petitioner ought to have replied to the show cause notice raising all the contentions. Without doing so, he rushed to this Court and therefore, the writ petition has to be dismissed. 5.Heard the counsel and perused the materials available on record. 6.There is no dispute that the petitioner ought to have given reply to the impugned notice within the stipulated time. Without doing the same, he has preferred the present writ petition. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the petitioner is directed to give reply to the impugned show cause notice within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, to the third respondent. On receipt of the reply from the petitioner, the third respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks thereafter. It is made clear that there should not be any coercive proceedings by the respondents against the petitioner, till the matter is taken up and disposed of as per the above direction. 7.With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1.The District Collector, Madurai. 2.The Superintending Engineer, Periyar Vaigai Division, 2nd Division, P.W.D., Madurai. 3.The Assistant Engineer, Periyar Vaigai Division, WRO, 1st Division, PWD, Madurai-2. 4.The Tahshildhar, Vadipatti, Madurai. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.22178 Km SR : 14.07.2011 : 3p/6c W.P.(MD)No.7544 of 2011 07.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/