L.RANI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, a challenge has been made by the petitioner to the notice dtd. 8/2/2020 issued by the third respondent with a prayer to quash it.

(2.) The notice dtd. 8/2/2020 was issued after a judgment of this court in the public interest litigation in W.P.No.3049 of 2019 (P.Senthil v. The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur and others) decided on 14/3/2019. A challenge to the notice dtd. 8/2/2020 has been made mainly on the ground that the proposed construction is situated 100 metres away from the prohibited area where the archaeological monument exists. The respondents stated the distance from the gate, ignoring the fact that it should have been from the structure of the monument and, accordingly, issued the notice to demolish the construction. In view of the above, a prayer is made to set aside the notice impugned in this writ petition.

(3.) A counter has been filed to the writ petition referring to the judgment of this court in the public interest litigation. During the pendency of a public interest litigation, an action was initiated by the official respondents to remove the unauthorised construction in question. This court while delivering the judgment in the public interest litigation, took note of the initiation of the action by the authorities and issued a direction to proceed further for an appropriate action against the fourth respondent therein for putting up unauthorised construction. The direction aforesaid was given after hearing the petitioner's husband. Therefore, such direction was binding on the petitioner, if the husband died during the interregnum period. That is the first part which is to be taken into consideration as per the argument of learned counsel for the respondents.