You may also like...
-
Justices R Subramanian, PT Asha and N Senthilkumar held that since the CSI runs or manages several educational institutes and hospitals, it performs a public duty. Therefore, writ petitions that pertain to these public duties were maintainable, the judgment said.
by Sekar Reporter · Published March 1, 2024
-
Though Mrs. Hema Sampath, learned senior counsel for the tenants and Temple would submit that the land may belong to the Government, but it does not belong to the Corporation and the Government is not a party, it is a fact that there is encroachment and no one has any right to squat on the property, which is a busy thoroughfare and we are of the view that the encroachment needs to be removed. Even in the suit filed in O.S. No. 3748 of 2009, the survey number has not been mentioned and the suit filed also appears to be a collusive one between the Temple and the tenants. Therefore, we are not inclined to accept the same. 13. These writ petitions are pending before this Court for more than 5 years. Since the Temple has no valid title, it is a clear case of encroachment. When there is an encroachment, in the considered opinion of this Court, the same has got to be removed. A direction is issued to the Temple Authorities to shift the deities to another place within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order without causing any damage to them failing which as per the internal communication dated 08.02.2019, it is for the Railway Administration to take action. After identification of a proper place for construction of temple and after completion of construction of temple, the deities can be shifted to the newly constructed temple as per the customary procedure. Since the Temple itself has been ordered to be removed, there is no other option for the tenants, who, under the guise of paying rents to the Temple, are taking shelter in occupying Government land illegally, which is nothing but an attempt to encroach upon Government land. Once the Temple itself has no title or valid documents, the claim of tenancy and receipt of rents by the Temple can merely be construed as an absurdity and wisecrack. 14. Though it is a fit case to impose costs on the Temple Authorities and tenants for their venture to squat on the Government property, thereby curtailing implementation of a public welfare scheme to come into effect, we refrain to do so for the present. 15. With the above directions, these writ petitions stand dismissed. No costs. (S.V.N.J.) (K.R.S.J.) nv 21.08.2023 To 1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai – 3. 2. The Zonal Officer, Zone X, Greater Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai. 3. The Executive Officer, Vilayattu Vinayagar Temple, T. Nagar, Chennai – 17. 4. The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. 5. The Divisional Manager, Southern Railways, Chennai -3. S. VAIDYANATHAN,J. AND K. RAJASEKAR,J. nv W.P.Nos. 20593 & 23496 of 2018 21.08.2023
by Sekar Reporter · Published November 1, 2023
-
This Court, after hearing the respective parties, is of the view that the issue cannot be kept pending endlessly. Hence, the interim order already granted by this Court on 29.06.2022 is modified to the extent that the investigation shall go on and the petitioner shall cooperate for the enquiry, which will be conducted by the respondents. It is made clear that this Court has not rendered any opinion on the legal submissions made by the parties on merits, including the maintainability of the writ petition, for the reason that the petitioner’s right with regard to the plea raised in the writ petition has got to be protected. List this matter on 09.09.2022. (S.V.N. J.,) (A.D.J.C. J.,) 04.08.2022 Petitioner Counsel Respondent Counsel G.MANI PRABHU S.RAGHUL R.D.ASHOK KUMAR M/S. N.RAMESH SPC FOR R1 AND R SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMEN
by Sekar Reporter · Published August 12, 2022