IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 17.11.2006 Coram: The Honourable Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM and The Honourable Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN Writ Appeal No.2202 of 2001 = = = = = = Dr.D.S.Rajalakshmi Educational Society and Institute of Social Service, having regd. Office at No.4, Bhujanga Rao Street, rep. by its President P.R.Narashimhan, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015. ... Appellant Vs. 1. The Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Tambaram, Chennai 600 045. 2. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengleput Division, Chengleput. 4. K.P.Anandan ... Respondents = = = = = = Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 12.07.2000 made in W.P.No.11662 of 2000. ``````` For Appellant : Mr.F.X.A.F.Dennu For respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.P.Subramanian, Government Advocate For 4th respondent : No appearance ``````` JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.SATHASIVAM, J.)
The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 12.07.2000 made in W.P.No.11662 of 2000, in and by which, the learned single Judge, after making an observation that the grievance expressed by the petitioner has to be agitated only before the Civil Court, has dismissed the writ petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Government Advocate for Respondents 1 to 3.
3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner, absolutely there is no dispute as to the title of the land in question. In such circumstances, it is stated that there is no need to move the Civil Court for any relief. The petitioner, in the year 2000 itself sought for appropriate direction to the first respondent-Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045, for disposal of the representation dated 30.01.2000. Though the request of the learned counsel for the appellant is quite reasonable and acceptable, in view of the efflux of time, viz., nearly six years, we are not inclined to issue such a direction at this juncture. Therefore, while setting aside the direction/observation made by the learned single Judge, we permit the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the first respondent-Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045, to vindicate his grievance within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if any such representation is made, the first respondent-Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
4. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
raa
To
1. The Tahsildar,
Tambaram Taluk,
Tambaram,
Chennai 600 045.
2. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
Kancheepuram.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Chengleput Division,
Chengleput.