Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, V. Chinnaiya, 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 fourth respondent, the Village Administrative Officer, to remove encroachments allegedly made by the sixth respondent on land in S.No.47/12 belonging to Papanadhi Amman Temple at Valarodai, Kurinjur Village, Perambur, Pudukkottai District. The petitioner had submitted a representation to the respondents on 19.11.2024 for removal of the encroachment, 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 to consider it on its merits and pass appropriate orders; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty. The court directed the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2024, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the sixth respondent, and all other interested persons, and pass 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. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Representation - Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty - Court directed the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2024 on its own merits after hearing all interested parties, within three months - Held that the court can invoke Article 226 to direct consideration of representation (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the fourth respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment on temple land.
Final Decision
The court directed the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the sixth respondent, and all other interested persons, within a period of 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
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 386
M.S. Ramesh, A.D. Maria Clete
Mr. K. Shreenivasan (for petitioner), Mr. P. Thilak Kumar (Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4)
1. The District Collector, Pudukkottai; 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ezhupur, Pudukkottai; 3. The Tahsildar, Perambur Taluk, Pudukkottai District; 4. The Village Administrative Officer, Villarodai, Suriyur Village, Pudukkottai; 5. Leema Rani; 6. M. Balasubramaniam
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 the fourth respondent to remove encroachments on temple land.
Remedy Sought
Direction to the fourth respondent to remove encroachments made in S.No.47/12 in Papanadhi Amman Temple land at Valarodai, Kurinjur Village, Perambur, Pudukkottai District by the sixth respondent within a stipulated time.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2024 for removal of encroachment was not considered by the respondents.
Issues
Whether the fourth respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation regarding removal of encroachment on temple land.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that he gave a representation on 19.11.2024 for removal of encroachment, but it was not considered.
Respondents 1 to 4 represented by Government Pleader.
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, justifying invocation of 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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on 06.01.2025, seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the fourth respondent to remove encroachments on temple land. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the stage of admission and disposed it on the same day.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
