CHINNATHANGAM Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR; PROJECT DIRECTOR,DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PANAMARATHUPATTI BLOCK; PRESIDENT, VILLAGE PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 3rd respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.532/2014/T2, dated 17.04.2014 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the 3rd respondent to release the amount towards 'Green House' based on the petitioner's representation dated 31.08.2016.

(2.) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred by the petitioner, as follows:-

(3.) When the matter was taken up consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made a detailed argument by reiterating the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is the main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not own any house and her husband deserted her very long back and she is living separately. In fact, the 3rd respondent had allotted a green house by his order dated 14.03.2014. Based on the allotment order, the petitioner has also started to construct the house by availing loan from the third parties. Now, the 4th respondent, who is having previous enmity with the petitioner's son Boopathy, instigated the 3rd respondent stating as if the petitioner is living with her husband and her husband is working in Postal Department; that the 3rd respondent has also cancelled the allotment order without any valid reason.