Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, B. Kannan, 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 (respondent 1), Revenue Divisional Officer (respondent 2), and Tahsildar (respondent 3) to remove an alleged encroachment made by private respondents 4 to 6 (R. Vengateshwari, R. Srinivasan, R. Rajammal) on a government poramboke common pathway in Survey No.404/21, Naranapuram Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District. The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 09.12.2024 to the authorities, but it was not considered, prompting the filing of the writ petition. The court observed that when 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. Accordingly, the court directed respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner's representation within three months, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, private respondents, and all interested persons. 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 - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty to consider it on merits and pass orders; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying a writ of mandamus directing consideration within a stipulated time (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents 1 to 3 should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of alleged encroachment on government poramboke land.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.12.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 4 to 6, 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) 378
M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete
Mr.I.Pinaygash (for petitioner), Mr.P.Thilak Kumar (for respondents 1 to 3)
1. The District Collector / Monitoring Committee, 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, 3. The Tahsildar, 4. R. Vengateshwari, 5. R. Srinivasan, 6. R. Rajammal
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 encroachment on government poramboke land.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner seeks direction to respondents 1 to 3 to remove encroachment made by respondents 4 to 6 on government poramboke common pathway in Survey No.404/21, Naranapuram Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by considering his representation dated 09.12.2024.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's representation dated 09.12.2024 regarding removal of alleged encroachment was not considered by the authorities.
Issues
Whether the respondents 1 to 3 should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of alleged encroachment on government poramboke land.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that he gave a representation on 09.12.2024 for removal of alleged encroachment, but it was not considered.
Respondents 1 to 3 consented to the disposal of the writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi
Whenever a representation 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; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, and the court can direct consideration under Article 226.
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 representation on 09.12.2024 to the respondents 1 to 3 regarding removal of alleged encroachment. Since the representation was not considered, the petitioner filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the admission stage and passed the order on 06.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
