1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD).No.825 of 2011 Boopathy : Appellant Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary, Department of Local Administration and Rural Development, Fort.St.George, Chennai 9. 2.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Assistant Director, (Panchayats), Madurai 20. 4.The Block Development Officer, (Panchayats), Alanganallur Panchayat Union, Alanganallur, Madurai District. 5.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 6.Mr.Kulu @ Thiruvakone, S/o.Karuppankone, President, Maniyanji Panchayat, Alanganallur Panchayat Union, Vadipatty Taluk, Madurai District. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 11.08.2011 made in W.P.(MD).No.3750 of 2010 on the file of this Court. WP(MD)No.3750 of 2010:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent, the District Collector, the Inspector of Panchayats to pass an order canncelling the 'C' form license given to Mr.Meyvazhi Chelliah Ananthar, the father of the fifth respondent to operate “Mahalakshmi Touruing Theatre” and consequently direct the subordinate revenue authorities to take possession of the land and hand over the same to the administration of Panchayat Board for untilising it to meet the needs of the students community and the common public. For Appellant : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 JUDGMENT ************* [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY P.JYOTHIMANI, J] The appellant, who is the fifth respondent in the Writ Petition, has filed the present Writ Appeal as against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 11.08.2011 passed in W.P.(MD).No.3750 of 2010. 2. His grievance is that even though his counsel has filed vakalat on behalf of him, which has been returned, for the reason that the name of the fifth respondent has not been written, he was not heard. 3. If it is the grievance of the appellant that he was not heard and an order has been passed, it is for him to take necessary steps in filing Review Application as against the order of the learned Single Judge and the Writ Appeal is not a remedy. Accordingly, giving liberty to the appellant to file appropriate application before the learned Single Judge, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S) To 1. The Secretary, Department of Local Administration and Rural Development, Fort.St.George, Chennai 9. 2. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 3. The Assistant Director, (Panchayats), Madurai 20. 4. The Block Development Officer, (Panchayats), Alanganallur Panchayat Union, Alanganallur, Madurai District. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. + 1 cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate, SR No.28979 JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.825 of 2011 25.08.2011 NB RJ/26.8.11 (IT) 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/