R.MOHAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondent not to effect the writ petitioner from No.A-133 / 2174 in Survey No.35/ 1-G, Panchanthangi Eri, Salem.

(2.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioner contends that the writ petitioner is affected on account of the impugned oral eviction order, informed by the 2nd respondent. The main ground raised in the writ petition is that the respondents have not followed the procedures contemplated under the Statutes. More than 3,000 families are living in the locality consisting of 10,000 members, however, the fact remains that the present writ petition is filed by one writ petitioner Mr. R.Mohan.

(3.) It is stated by the writ petitioner that there is no possibility of harvesting water in that area and therefore, the people have occupied the premises and constructed thatched houses. The petitioner is of an opinion that the construction of houses in that locality would not affect the free flow of water in that locality. However, it has admitted in the affidavit that the writ petitioner has constructed the house in the land classified as Eri Poramboke more specifically Panchanthangi Eri.