Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- S M SUBRAMANIAM
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 09.07.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet: Yes / No krkTo:1.The District Collector, Korampallam,____________Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019 Thoothukudi District.…
Judgment
W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 09.07.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAMandTHE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETEW.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019andW.M.P.(MD) No.5206 of 2019G.Pachai Perumal ... Petitioner-vs-1.State of Tamilnadu rep.by its the District Collector Korampallam Thoothukudi District2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Thoothukudi Thoothukudi District3.The Tahsildar Srivaikundam Taluk Thoothukudi District4.Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai-600 005____________Page 1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 20195.Rajesh6.The Tahsildar Eral Taluk Tuticorin District... Respondents[R6 is suo motu impleaded vide Court order dated 20.03.2019]PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove encroachments in the irrigation channel to an extent of about 5 Acres 72 Cents comprised in Survey No.132, Valavallan Village, Srivaikundam Taluk, Thoothukudi District, based on the communication of the fourth respondent dated 22.05.2017 and also the representation given to the first respondent on 04.02.2019 within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner: No appearanceFor Respondents: Mr.P.ThilakkumarGovernment Pleader for R1 to R4 & R6Mr.S.Kadarkarai for R6
O R D E R____________Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]On 07.07.2025, when the writ petition came up for consideration, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Accordingly, this writ petition is listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. In such circumstances, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the writ petition for non-prosecution.
Operative part
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 09.07.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet: Yes / No krkTo:1.The District Collector, Korampallam,____________Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019 Thoothukudi District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
The Tahsildar, Srivaikundam Taluk, Thoothukudi District.
The Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
The Tahsildar, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.____________Page 4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.andDR.A.D.MARIA CLETE , J. krkW.P.(MD) No.6516 of 2019andW.M.P.(MD) No.5206 of 201909.07.2025____________Page 5 of 5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
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.