Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, T. Muniyandi, 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 District Collector and the Tahsildar (respondents 1 and 2) to take action to remove an alleged illegal encroachment made by the third respondent, Muthupandi, on government poromboke lands in Survey Nos. 36/20 and 36/28 located in Ve.Illupaikulam Village, Mithilaikulam Panchayat, Veeracholan Sub Registrar, Thiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District. The petitioner had given a representation to the official respondents on 19.04.2023 for removal of the encroachment, but it was not considered. 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; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty. Accordingly, the court directed respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2023, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the third respondent, and all other interested persons, 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.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Representation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - 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; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying invocation of extraordinary powers under Article 226 to direct consideration within a stipulated time (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of alleged encroachment on government poramboke lands.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2023, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the third respondent, and all other interested persons, 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.
Law Points
- Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
- Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
- Writ of Mandamus under Article 226
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 181
W.P.(MD)No.1325 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.896 of 2025
M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete
Mr.B.Anandan (for petitioner), Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader (for respondents 1 & 2)
1. The District Collector / Monitoring Committee, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2. The Tahsildar, Thiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District. 3. Muthupandi
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 authorities to remove alleged illegal encroachment on government poromboke lands.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner seeks direction to respondents 1 and 2 to initiate action to remove illegal encroachment made by the third respondent in government poromboke lands in Survey Nos. 36/20 and 36/28.
Filing Reason
Petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2023 to the official respondents for removal of alleged encroachment was not considered.
Issues
Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of alleged encroachment on government poromboke lands.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that he gave a representation on 19.04.2023 for removal of encroachment, but it was not considered.
Respondents 1 and 2 did not file any counter; the court proceeded based on the petitioner's submissions.
Ratio Decidendi
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; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying invocation of extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct consideration within a stipulated time.
Judgment Excerpts
It is needless to point out that 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
The petitioner filed a writ petition on 21.01.2025 before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the stage of admission. The court dispensed with notice to the private respondent as it was directing the official respondents to consider the representation after giving due opportunity to the private respondent.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
