Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, S. Saravanan, 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 official respondents (District Collector, District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Tahsildar, Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, and Revenue Inspector) to remove the alleged encroachment made by the private respondents (R. Meenachikumar and S. Mathisankar) on government poramboke land comprising Survey Nos. 950 and 1646/2 situated at Sankaralingapuram Village, Ondipulinayakkanoor Revenue, Virudhunagar Taluk and District. The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 14.09.2024 to the first and sixth respondents, but it was not considered, prompting the filing of the writ petition. The court observed that whenever a representation 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, and non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty. Accordingly, the court directed the respondents 1 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time, after giving due opportunity to the private respondents. Notice to the private respondents was dispensed with as the court was only directing consideration of the representation. The writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage by consent of both sides.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty - Court directed respondents 1 to 6 to consider petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2024 within a stipulated time, after giving opportunity to private respondents - Held that whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty to consider it on its merits and pass appropriate orders (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court should direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment on government poramboke land.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2024, after giving due opportunity to the private respondents, and pass appropriate orders within a stipulated time. The writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage.
Law Points
- Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
- Mandamus for non-consideration of representation
- Dereliction of duty by statutory authority
