Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Andiyappan, 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—the District Collector, Karur; the Tahsildar, Kulithalai; the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai; and the Block Development Officer (Panchayats), Thogaimalai Panchayat Union—to remove an encroachment on a public pathway. The pathway runs from Keelaveliyur, Mariamman Thirukovil South to Thirumalai Nagar in Kalladai Village, S.F.No.807, Kulithalai Taluk, Karur District. The petitioner had previously given a representation to the respondents on 31.01.2024 regarding the encroachment, which was not considered. The court noted that the third respondent had already issued proceedings in Na.KA.A3/11/2023 dated 02/06/2023 concerning the encroachment. 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, instead of keeping it pending indefinitely. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, and thus the court is justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 to direct consideration within a stipulated time. Accordingly, the court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.01.2024 on its own merits 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, and it was open to the respondents to consider the representation independently. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty to Consider Representation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The petitioner sought a direction to remove encroachment on a public pathway based on a prior proceeding. The court held that a statutory authority has a duty to consider a representation on its merits and pass appropriate orders; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying a writ of mandamus. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment on a public pathway.
Final Decision
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.01.2024 on its own merits 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
