AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Jyothimani, J.—The Writ Petition is for a direction against the first Respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 9.7.2007.
A reference to the representation shows that the complaint of the Petitioner is against the conduct of the third Respondent in putting up construction in Plot No. 57, Soodamanipuram Lay Out in TS No. 429, Karaikudi Town, which is claimed to be belonging to the Petitioner. Therefore, it is clear that the case of the Petitioner is that the third Respondent has put up a structure in the said property, which belongs to her. In that background, she makes a representation to the first Respondent on 9.7.2007 on the ground that the third Respondent has put up the construction without obtaining proper approval and therefore, the construction is unauthorised.
On the face of it, such dispute between the Petitioner and the third Respondent cannot be settled by the first Respondent. If really, the Petitioner has got any grievance against the unlawful activity of the third Respondent in putting up the construction in her property, it is for her to work out remedy at the first instance to get possession from the third Respondent in the manner known to law. Without doing so, her approach to consider the representation, in our view, is an abuse of process of law.
In such view of the matter, the Writ Petition cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Leaving it open to the Petitioner to work out her remedy against the third Respondent, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.