Nellai R. Sollalagan vs The District Collector and Others

P. Jyothimani, J.—The Petitioner has come forward with this writ petition, in public interest, to forbear the 3rd and 4th Respondents from interfering in the peaceful enjoyment of the piece of land which extends about 5 cents, situated in Survey No. 48 and 49 of Manalivilai Village of Thisayan Vilai Town Panchayat, Tirunelveli District, vide the patta issued by the 5th Respondent, dated 08.08.1961, for the communal usage, during Dasara Festival.

Learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the Respondents. Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the affidavit filed in support of the Petitioner as well as the typed set of papers.

Last year when the Petitioner came with a similar prayer in W.P. (MD) No. 9024 of 2009, a Division Bench of this Court, upon hearing the counsel on either side, passed the following order on 10.09.2009.

The Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the third and fourth Respondents from interfering in the peaceful enjoyment of the piece of land which extends 5 cents situated in Survey Nos. 48 and 49 of Manalivilai Village of Thisayan Vilai Town Panchayat, Tirunelveli District vide the patta issued by the fifth Respondent dated 08.08.1961 for the communal usage.

On hearing the submissions of the learned Special Government Pleader for the Respondents and going through the facts and considering the undertaking given by the Petitioner that the usage of the land is only for the purpose of putting up temporary thatched shed from 26.08.2009 to 06.10.2009 that they would not be claiming any right thereaferwards to have that place occupied by putting up thatched shed, the prayer sought for in this writ is granted.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.

Today, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, learned Counsel for the Petitioner gave an undertaking that during this year also the Petitioner is going to use the land for a limited period i.e. from 12.09.2010 to 25.10.2010 by putting up a thatched shed and thereafter he will not claim any right over the property or continue to keep the thatched shed in the said land.

Considering the undertaking of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and following the earlier order of this Court, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd and 4th Respondents not to disturb the enjoyment of the Petitioner by putting up a thatched shed in the land in question for the period from 12.09.2010 to 25.10.2010. We make it clear that this shall not be treated as a precedent in future.

With the above direction and observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Connected M.P. (MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2010 are closed.