Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Balachandran, 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, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tahsildar, and Block Development Officer (respondents 1 to 4) to remove an alleged pathway encroachment made by private respondents 5 to 7 (Durai, Vellaikannu, and Sadasivam) in Survey Nos. 249 and 250 situated near the western side of Manpparai to Thuvarankurichi Highways, Karumalai Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District. The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 16.08.2024 to the official respondents requesting removal of the encroachment, but the representation 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 respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, private respondents 5 to 7, 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. 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. The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation within three months after hearing all interested parties. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents 1 to 4 are bound to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2024 regarding removal of alleged pathway encroachment.
Final Decision
The Court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7, 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.
Law Points
- Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
- Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
- Writ of Mandamus under Article 226
