High Court · 2024

W.P.No.8373 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 01.04.2024CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANIW.P.No.8373 of 2024andW.M.P.No.9329 of 2024B.Shagitha Bee... PetitionerVs.1.The State rep by Inspector of Police, Panrutti Police Station, Panrutti.2.The Managing Committee, Anwarsha Edgah Wakt rep by its President, Anwarsha Edgah Complex, Vadakailasam, Cuddalore Road, Panrutti – 607 106. ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to accord police protection and prevent the 2nd respondent from any manner illegally interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner by raising a compound wall and blocking ingress and egress to the petitioner's residence, in respect of the passage in north-west direction in secluded area in the prayer ground in Anwarsha Edgah Dargah from street inside the ground providing access to the petitioner's residence, Page No.1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024Vadakailasam village, Panrutti Sub-district, Cuddalore district, in light of the fair and decreetal order in OA No.38 of 2022 dated 26.07.2022 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai as sought vide representation dated 29.02.2024 made by the petitioner.For Petitioner:Mr.N.A.Nassir HussainFor Respondents:Mr.S.Udaya KumarGovt. Adv. (Crl.Side) [R1]Mr.G.Mohan [R2]*****ORDERThis Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to accord police protection and prevent the 2nd respondent from any manner illegally interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner by raising a compound wall and blocking ingress and egress to the petitioner's residence, in respect of the passage in north-west direction in secluded area in the prayer ground in Anwarsha Edgah Dargah from street inside the ground providing access to the petitioner's residence, Vadakailasam village, Panrutti Sub-district, Cuddalore district, in light of the fair and decreetal order in OA No.38 of 2022 dated 26.07.2022 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai as sought vide representation dated Page No.2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 202429.02.2024 made by the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that, the shop bearing No.157B, Hospital road, (Cuddlore Main Road), Vadakailasam, Panruti, measuring 160 sq.ft. was initially leased out to Anwar Basha and thereafter, to A.Babu Hussain, who is the son of Anwar Bash and husband of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent under lease agreement dated 14.02.2019. The land rent was fixed at Rs.100/- per month and advance amount is Rs.2,000/-. The 2nd respondent had also leased out a passage to Anwar Basha father of A.Babu Hussain to have access to his residence from the street under a lease agreement dated 14.02.2005 for a rent of Rs.200/- for 11 months morefully described in Item 2 of the schedule and the pathyway to the shop was disturbed by the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed in O.A.No.38 of 2022 before the Tamil Nadu Wakf Tribunal for permanent injuctions to restrain the 2nd respondent and the Tribunal granted permanent injunctoin restrainig the 2nd respondent from any manner interfering with the peaceful, enjoyment of the application mentioned property. However, liberty granted to the 2nd respondent to intiate proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises Page No.3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024(Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1975 by issuance of termination notice dated 23.06.2022 in the manner known to law. However, without following the due process of law, hurriedly, the 2nd respondent tried to contruct a compound wall preventing the petitioner to access his residence. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation before the 1st respondent on 29.02.2024 seeking police protection, however the same was not considered. Hence, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, inspite of an injunction and orders prohibiting from interfering with the peaceful possession of the subject property, the 2nd respondent is illegally attempting to trespass and raise and compound wall, which is wholly unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders.4. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that, the decree is only in respect of the injunction granted as agianst the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner without due process of law and permitted the 2nd respondent to follow the due process of law by invoking Page No.4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024the provisions under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1971 by issuing termination notice. However, the 2nd respondent is ready to produce all those documents and canvass all those points before the law enforcing agency, where the petitioner has made his representation. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.6. Though the petitioner claims that there was a permanent injuction as against the 2nd respondent for evicting the petitioner from the subject property, whereby, he obtained decree of injunction as against the 2nd respondent in O.A.No.38 of 2022 on the file of Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai, vide order 26.07.2022, whereas the 2nd respondent claims that only a limited injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was permitted to proceed with the matter under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1971 by issuing termination notice and Page No.5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024there is no blanket order as against the 2nd respondent.7. In view of the above, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 29.02.2024 on merits and take suitable action in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.01.04.2024Index : Yes / NoSpeaking order / Non-speaking orderNCC:Yes/NospPage No.6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024To1.The Inspector of Police, Panrutti Police Station, Panrutti.2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.Page No.7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024M.DHANDAPANI, J.spW.P.No.8373 of 202401.04.2024Page No.8 of 8

W.P.No.8373 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 01.04.2024CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANIW.P.No.8373 of 2024andW.M.P.No.9329 of 2024B.Shagitha Bee... PetitionerVs.1.The State rep by Inspector of Police, Panrutti Police Station, Panrutti.2.The Managing Committee, Anwarsha Edgah Wakt rep by its President, Anwarsha Edgah Complex, Vadakailasam, Cuddalore Road, Panrutti – 607 106. ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to accord police protection and prevent the 2nd respondent from any manner illegally interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner by raising a compound wall and blocking ingress and egress to the petitioner's residence, in respect of the passage in north-west direction in secluded area in the prayer ground in Anwarsha Edgah Dargah from street inside the ground providing access to the petitioner's residence, Page No.1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024Vadakailasam village, Panrutti Sub-district, Cuddalore district, in light of the fair and decreetal order in OA No.38 of 2022 dated 26.07.2022 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai as sought vide representation dated 29.02.2024 made by the petitioner.For Petitioner:Mr.N.A.Nassir HussainFor Respondents:Mr.S.Udaya KumarGovt. Adv. (Crl.Side) [R1]Mr.G.Mohan [R2]*****ORDERThis Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to accord police protection and prevent the 2nd respondent from any manner illegally interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner by raising a compound wall and blocking ingress and egress to the petitioner's residence, in respect of the passage in north-west direction in secluded area in the prayer ground in Anwarsha Edgah Dargah from street inside the ground providing access to the petitioner's residence, Vadakailasam village, Panrutti Sub-district, Cuddalore district, in light of the fair and decreetal order in OA No.38 of 2022 dated 26.07.2022 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai as sought vide representation dated Page No.2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 202429.02.2024 made by the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that, the shop bearing No.157B, Hospital road, (Cuddlore Main Road), Vadakailasam, Panruti, measuring 160 sq.ft. was initially leased out to Anwar Basha and thereafter, to A.Babu Hussain, who is the son of Anwar Bash and husband of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent under lease agreement dated 14.02.2019. The land rent was fixed at Rs.100/- per month and advance amount is Rs.2,000/-. The 2nd respondent had also leased out a passage to Anwar Basha father of A.Babu Hussain to have access to his residence from the street under a lease agreement dated 14.02.2005 for a rent of Rs.200/- for 11 months morefully described in Item 2 of the schedule and the pathyway to the shop was disturbed by the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed in O.A.No.38 of 2022 before the Tamil Nadu Wakf Tribunal for permanent injuctions to restrain the 2nd respondent and the Tribunal granted permanent injunctoin restrainig the 2nd respondent from any manner interfering with the peaceful, enjoyment of the application mentioned property. However, liberty granted to the 2nd respondent to intiate proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises Page No.3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024(Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1975 by issuance of termination notice dated 23.06.2022 in the manner known to law. However, without following the due process of law, hurriedly, the 2nd respondent tried to contruct a compound wall preventing the petitioner to access his residence. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation before the 1st respondent on 29.02.2024 seeking police protection, however the same was not considered. Hence, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, inspite of an injunction and orders prohibiting from interfering with the peaceful possession of the subject property, the 2nd respondent is illegally attempting to trespass and raise and compound wall, which is wholly unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders.4. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that, the decree is only in respect of the injunction granted as agianst the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner without due process of law and permitted the 2nd respondent to follow the due process of law by invoking Page No.4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024the provisions under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1971 by issuing termination notice. However, the 2nd respondent is ready to produce all those documents and canvass all those points before the law enforcing agency, where the petitioner has made his representation. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.6. Though the petitioner claims that there was a permanent injuction as against the 2nd respondent for evicting the petitioner from the subject property, whereby, he obtained decree of injunction as against the 2nd respondent in O.A.No.38 of 2022 on the file of Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai, vide order 26.07.2022, whereas the 2nd respondent claims that only a limited injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was permitted to proceed with the matter under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1971 by issuing termination notice and Page No.5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024there is no blanket order as against the 2nd respondent.7. In view of the above, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 29.02.2024 on merits and take suitable action in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.01.04.2024Index : Yes / NoSpeaking order / Non-speaking orderNCC:Yes/NospPage No.6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024To1.The Inspector of Police, Panrutti Police Station, Panrutti.2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.Page No.7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8373 of 2024M.DHANDAPANI, J.spW.P.No.8373 of 202401.04.2024Page No.8 of 8