Madras High Court Directs Authorities to Consider Representation on Encroachment of Anathinam Land — Mandamus Issued for Disposal Within Three Months. Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty; Article 226 of Constitution of India invoked to direct consideration of representation dated 29.07.2024 regarding removal of encroachment on Anathinam Land in Survey No.265 of Nanjur Village.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 15
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Lakshmanan R.V., 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 (District Collector, District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, and Tahsildar of Pudukkottai District) to consider his representation dated 29.07.2024 and remove the alleged encroachment on 'Anathinam Land' in Survey No.265 of Nanjur Village, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai District. The petitioner had made the representation to the respondents, but it 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 invocation of extraordinary powers under Article 226. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024, on its own merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner 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, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Representation - Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty - Court directed respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders within three months, after hearing all interested parties - Held that Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be invoked to direct consideration of representation (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024 regarding removal of encroachment on Anathinam Land.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and all other interested persons, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Law Points

  • Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
  • Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
  • Article 226 power to direct consideration
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 68

W.P.(MD)No.2070 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.1464 of 2025

2025-01-27

M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete

Mr.S.Vijayasarathi (for petitioner), Mr.P.Thilak Kumar (Government Pleader for respondents)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct respondents to consider representation and remove encroachment.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a direction to respondents to consider his representation dated 29.07.2024 and remove encroachment on Anathinam Land in Survey No.265 of Nanjur Village.

Filing Reason

Non-consideration of petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024 by the respondents.

Issues

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2024 regarding removal of encroachment on Anathinam Land.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner submitted that representation dated 29.07.2024 was not considered by respondents. Respondents did not file counter; consent given for final disposal.

Ratio Decidendi

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 of the representation by the statutory authority would amount to dereliction of duty, and the court can invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct consideration within a stipulated time.

Judgment Excerpts

Whenever a representation of this nature 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 of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed representation on 29.07.2024; not considered; filed writ petition on unknown date; taken up for final disposal at admission stage by consent.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Directs Authorities to Consider Representation on Encroachment of Anathinam Land — Mandamus Issued for Disposal Within Three Months. Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty; Articl...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Suit in Family Partition Dispute, Sets Aside Rejection Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.