Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Veera Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Madras High Court seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 (District Collector, Block Development Officer, and Tahsildar) to consider his representation dated 22.01.2022 and consequently remove the alleged illegal encroachment and occupation by the 4th respondent on government road and Vaikkal Poromboke. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. K. Selvaraj, submitted that he could not secure instructions from the petitioner to proceed with the matter and reported no instructions. In view of this, the court, comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice C. Kumarappan, closed the writ petition without any adjudication on the merits of the case. The order was made by Justice S.M. Subramaniam. No costs were imposed. The court did not issue any directions regarding the alleged encroachment or the petitioner's representation.
Headnote
A) Writ Law - Non-Prosecution - Lack of Instructions - Petitioner's counsel reported inability to secure instructions from the petitioner to proceed with the matter - Court closed the writ petition without adjudicating on merits - Held that when counsel reports no instructions, the court may close the petition (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court should consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment when the petitioner's counsel reports no instructions.
Final Decision
The writ petition is closed. No order on merits.
Law Points
- Writ petition closed for non-prosecution
- no adjudication on merits
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (02) 272
S.M. Subramaniam, C. Kumarappan
Mr. K. Selvaraj (for petitioner), Mr. T. Arun Kumar (AGP for R1 to R3)
1. The District Collector, 2. The Block Development Officer, 3. The Tahsildar, 4. Mr. Palanisamy @ Palani
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking direction to remove alleged encroachment on government road and Vaikkal Poromboke.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought direction to respondents 1 to 3 to consider his representation dated 22.01.2022 and remove the alleged illegal encroachment and occupation by the 4th respondent.
Filing Reason
Alleged illegal encroachment and occupation by the 4th respondent on government road and Vaikkal Poromboke.
Issues
Whether the court should proceed with the writ petition when the petitioner's counsel reports no instructions.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that he could not secure instructions from the petitioner to proceed with the matter and reported no instructions.
Ratio Decidendi
When the petitioner's counsel reports no instructions and is unable to proceed, the court may close the writ petition without adjudicating on merits.
Judgment Excerpts
learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he could not be able to secure instructions from the petitioner to get along with the matter and reports no instructions.
In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is closed. No closed.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed in 2022. On 16-02-2026, when taken up for hearing, petitioner's counsel reported no instructions, leading to closure.
