B. THIRULOCHANA KUMARI Vs. THE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come forward with the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent with the assistance of the third respondent to remove the Party Board, Banner and Flag put up by the fifth respondent in front of the petitioner's property at Door No.30-A, Navalar agar, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 106.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that herself and her family were residing in the above address and they are the owners of the said property and it has been let out to a mechanic for running a mechanic shop. After the tenant vacated the premises, the petitioner is in occupation of the property. It is stated that in April 2017, the fifth respondent has erected a political party flag in front of the petitioner's property and when this was objected to by the petitioner, the fifth respondent threatened. On 13.04.2017, the petitioner sent a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 stating that there is an encroachment in front of the petitioner's property, thereby blocking the way of entry to the property and that the fifth respondent is causing nuisance. As the fourth respondent did not take the complaint on file, the petitioner sent a representation to the second respondent on 30.05.2017 asking the status about the petition, dated 13.04.2017. It has been stated by the Corporation of Chennai that necessary instructions have been given for removing the party flag and sign-board. Initially, it was removed and once again, the fifth respondent erected another sign-board in the very same place and threatened the petitioner with dire consequences. When the petitioner approached the fourth respondent to take action against the fifth respondent, he refused to receive the representation, as it appears that the fourth respondent has stated that if the petitioner is not going to keep quiet, a case will be registered under the provisions of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the fourth respondent is said to have used unparliamentary words. Since no steps have been taken to remove the party-flag, etc., the petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

(3.) The fourth respondent appeared in person and submitted that he has neither used any such abusive words nor stated that a case would be registered under the said SC and ST Act against the petitioner.