PADMINI SIVASUBRAMANIAN Vs. PANKAJ KUMAR BANSAL I A S SUB COLLECTOR TALUK OFFICE TIRUPPUR COIMBATORE DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application to punish respondent 1 to 3 for disobeying the order dated 27.4.2000 passed in W.P. No. 7646 of 2000.

(2.) PETITIONER had filed W.P. No. 7646 of 2000 praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus forbearing respondents 1 and 2 herein or his men or any person claiming under his authority from dispossessing the petitioner from the petition properties and from demolishing the properties situated at Palladam Road, Tiruppur. The writ petition was dismissed at the admission stage holding that there is no cause of action to seek the relief sought for. However, in para 3 of the order, I have observed as follows: The temple, as owners, are entitled to seek removal of encroachers, if any. However, they will have to follow the due process of law before eviction. The notice issued by the Sub-Collector obviously appears to be for cancellation of pattas given to the encroachers - and for further action. The Sub-Collector will pass appropriate orders before ordering removal on merits and in accordance with law. There is no cause of action at present to seek the relief sought for. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs."

(3.) THE learned Government Pleader produced the original file of the first respondent relating to the enquiry. In the copy of the notice dated 28.4.2000. it has been noted that the letter was given to him after office hours. In the copy of the letter produced by the learned senior counsel said to have been acknowledged by the second respondent, it is seen that one night watchman has acknowledged the letter.