Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Jaffar Sadiq, 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 respondents 1 to 4 (District Collector, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tahsildar, and Assistant Superintendent Engineer, Highway Department) to remove encroachments allegedly made by respondents 5 to 7 (Sarasu, Nallammal, Muruganantham) on land comprised in Survey No.42/1 and 42/2 at Puliyanthoppu Village, Thanjavur Taluk, Thanjavur District, classified as 'Vandipathai' (cart track) and 'Anatheenam' (government poramboke). The petitioner had made a representation dated 25.11.2024 to the official respondents seeking removal of the encroachments and restoration of the pathway for free access by villagers. Since the representation was not considered, the petitioner approached the High Court. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the admission stage. The court observed that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon it to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying invocation of extraordinary powers under Article 226. Accordingly, the court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.11.2024, on its own merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7, and all other interested persons, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of 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 and that the respondents were free to consider the representation on its own merits. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty to consider it on its own merits and pass appropriate orders; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying court's intervention under Article 226 (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court should direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachments on public pathway (Vandipathai) when the representation has not been acted upon.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.11.2024 on its own merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7, 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 under Article 226
