Chandran v. 2.The District Collector, Salem District, Salem.3.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Salem.4.The Assistant
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above observation and direction, the writ petitions are disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. With the above observation and direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.34834, 34838, 34840, 34842, 34852, 34853, 34857 and 34858 of 2024 are closed. (D.K.K., J.) (P.B.B., J.) 29.10.2024 Index : Yes/NoNC:Yes/Nobbr____________Page 6 of…
Judgment
W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 29.10.2024CORAM :THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMARANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJIW.P.Nos.32072, 32076, 32078, 32080, 32088, 32090, 32092 and 32093 of 2024 Chandran.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32072/2024Rangaramanujan.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32076/2024Murugan.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32078/2024Rani.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32080/2024Murugan.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32088/2024Ponnusamy.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32090/2024Jagadesan.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32092/2024____________Page 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc. Jayalakshmi.. Petitioner inW.P.No.32093/2024Vs1.State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
The District Collector, Salem District, Salem.
The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Salem.
The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Vazhappadi, Salem District... Respondents in all WPsPrayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the fourth respondent in issuance of notices dated 7.10.2024 and quash the same and direct the third respondent, the authority competent under the Highways Act if he chooses to proceed further to comply with the provisions of Highways Act by affording an opportunity of being heard.____________Page 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc. For the Petitioners: Mr.D.Yashwanth RajanFor the Respondents: Mr.A.Edwin PrabakarState Government PleaderCOMMON ORDER(Order of the Court was made by D.Krishnakumar, J.) The prayer in these writ petitions is as follows:
... to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 4th respondent in issuance of Notices dated 07.10.2024 and quash the same and direct the 3rd respondent, the authority competent under the Highways Act if he chooses to proceed further to comply with the provisions of Highways Act by affording an opportunity of being heard ...
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the fourth respondent, viz., the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, is not the competent authority to issue ____________Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc.the impugned notices and only the Divisional Engineer, Highways Department has power to issue the notices. Since impugned notices issued by the fourth respondent are without jurisdiction, the same are liable to be quashed. 3. Learned State Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners have encroached upon the highways land and, for removal of such encroachment, the impugned notices have been issued. He further submitted that by the proceedings of the Divisional Engineer dated 8.8.2024, an authorisation has been given to the Assistant Executive Engineer, Highways Department to issue eviction notices (impugned notices).
Therefore, there is no illegality in issuing the impugned notices. Learned State Government Pleader also placed on record the said proceedings dated 8.8.2024. 4. We have gone through the proceedings of the Divisional ____________Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc. Engineer dated 8.8.2024, wherefrom it is clear that the Divisional Engineer has given authorisation to the Assistant Divisional Engineer to initiate action for removal of encroachment on the highways land in question. Thus, the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners that the fourth respondent/Assistant Divisional Engineer has no authority to issue the impugned notices cannot be countenanced.
Encroachment on the highways land has been alleged against the petitioners, for which the impugned notices dated 7.10.2024 have been issued to the petitioners calling upon them to remove the encroachments within 7 days, failing which the encroachments will be removed on 18.10.2024.
It is an admitted case that till date the encroachments have not been removed. In such circumstances, the impugned notices shall be treated as show cause notices and the petitioners shall file explanation to the said show cause notices within a ____________Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc.period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Upon receipt of such explanation, the competent authority, viz., the fourth respondent shall pass orders on merits and in accordance with law after providing an opportunity to the petitioners and then remove the encroachments as per the Highways Act within a period of eight weeks thereafter. Till such time, both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo.
Operative part
With the above observation and direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.34834, 34838, 34840, 34842, 34852, 34853, 34857 and 34858 of 2024 are closed. (D.K.K., J.) (P.B.B., J.) 29.10.2024 Index : Yes/NoNC:Yes/Nobbr____________Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc. To:1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.2.The District Collector, Salem District, Salem. 3. The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Salem. 4. The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Vazhappadi, Salem District.____________Page 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32072 of 2024 etc.D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.AND P.B.BALAJI,J.bbr W.P.Nos.32072, 32076, 32078, 32080, 32088, 32090, 32092 and 32093 of 2024 29.10.2024____________Page 8 of 8
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above observation and direction, the writ petitions are disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.