High Court Madras High Court

S.Umamaheswari vs The Executive Officer on 16 March, 2011

Madras High Court
S.Umamaheswari vs The Executive Officer on 16 March, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Date:16.3.2011

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR

Writ Petition No.6319 of 2011  
and
M.P.No.1 of 2011 


S.Umamaheswari,                                                       ... Petitioner 

         vs.				

The Executive Officer,
Suriyampalayam Panchayat,
Erode & District.                                                      ... Respondent 
 

	Writ Petition  is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records in respect of the notice of the respondent vide Na.Ka.No.37/2011 dated 18.2.2011 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondent, their men and subordinates from interfering with petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land having Plot No.35, in R.S.No.35 in R.S.No.269/1 of Suriyampalayam Village, Erode Taluk & District.


	For Petitioner   		:       Mr.I.C.Vasudevan 

	For Respondent 		:	Mrs.R.Anitha,
						Additional Government Pleader
-----
O R D E R

Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records in respect of the notice of the respondent vide Na.Ka.No.37/2011 dated 18.2.2011 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondent, their men and subordinates from interfering with petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land having Plot No.35, in R.S.No.35 in R.S.No.269/1 of Suriyampalayam Village, Erode Taluk & District.

2. Mrs.R.Anitha, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. The writ petitioner challenges the impugned notice dated 18.2.2011 issued by the respondent calling upon the petitioner not to construct the building in violation of law in the property belonging to the panchayat. According to the petitioner, she is constructing building as per approved plan and there is no violation of law.

4. Since the impugned proceedings is in the nature of notice, petitioner is given liberty to give reply to the notice along with a representation to the respondent. On receipt of reply and representation, the respondent shall consider the reply and the representation on its own merits and proceed strictly in accordance with law.

5. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

ts

To

The Executive Officer,
Suriyampalayam Panchayat,
Erode AND District