Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Palanivelu, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 (Tahsildar, Block Development Officer, and Village Panchayat President) to remove an alleged encroachment in Survey No.104/2, Sathanur Village, Ponamaravathy Taluk, Pudukkottai District. The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 21.05.2024 to the official respondents requesting removal of the encroachment, but the representation was not considered, leading to the filing of the writ petition. The court observed that whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty to consider it on its merits and pass appropriate orders without indefinite delay. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying the court's intervention under Article 226. The court directed the first respondent (Tahsildar) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.05.2024 on its own merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the fourth respondent (private party), and all other interested persons, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The court clarified that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the matter. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority to Consider Representation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, and the court is justified in directing consideration within a stipulated time. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court should direct the statutory authority to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment when the representation has been pending indefinitely.
Final Decision
The court directed the first respondent (Tahsildar) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.05.2024 on its own merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the fourth respondent, and all other interested persons, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
- Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
- Writ of Mandamus maintainable for direction to consider representation
