Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 15 to May 21

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 143 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 145

NOMINAL INDEX

Dr T Murugavel v The Additional Chief Secretary and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 143

Mathiyari v The District Collector and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 144

Harini v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 145

REPORT

‘Crass Commercialism’: Madras High Court Restrains Govt From Organizing Heli Tourism During Summer Festival In Nilgiris

Case Title: Dr T Murugavel v The Additional Chief Secretary and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 143

While restraining the State from going forward with the heli-tourism proposed to be conducted in the Nilgiris area as part of the Summer Festival, the Madras High Court emphasized that the fragile eco-system and vulnerability of the bio-diverse region cannot not become a victim of crass commercialism.

The division bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice Nirmal Kumar noted that the proposal to conduct Heli-tourism was made by the Tourism Department without proper study and without discussions with the Forest Department or the wildlife wardens and was merely to generate revenue for the State.

The court noted that the feasibility of the helicopter operation in an ecologically sensitive region should have been cautiously approached and carefully addressed. It added that tourism policies must strike a balance with public concerns, specifically environment and wildlife.

Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act: Even After 125 Years, Revenue Authorities Still Haven't Understood Its Purport: Madras High Court

Case Title: Mathiyari v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 144

While criticizing revenue authorities for indirectly aiding encroachers, the Madras High Court has said that even after 125 years of enactment, the revenue authorities have still not understood the purport of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

The division bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice L Victoria Gowri was dealing with a plea challenging an order passed under Section 7 of the Act. The court, after going through the order, noted that the order disclosed the “extraordinary magnanimity" of the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar to help the petitioner. The court was also satisfied that the order was passed for some illegal consideration.

Intimation Of Arrest Through SMS Hampers Constitutional Safeguard Of Effective Representation: Madras High Court Quashes Detention Order

Case Title: Harini v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 145

The Madras High Court recently set aside a detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Avadi City on the ground that the intimation of arrest of the detenue made through an SMS which was improper.

The division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice Nirmal Kumar observed that the right of the detenu to make effective representation is a constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article 22 of the Constitution and this right was hampered in the present case since the intimation was not made in a proper manner.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Madras High Court Seeks State's Response On Plea Seeking Rent-Free Housing Quarters For Teachers

The Madras High Court has asked the State to respond to a plea seeking rent-free accommodation for teachers in schools and colleges, both government and private.

The division bench of Justice CV Karthikeyan and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy directed the State to file their counter within a period of four weeks in the plea by M Purushothaman, an advocate.

Centre Notifies Appointment Of Four Judicial Officers As Additional Judges Of Madras High Court

The Union Government on Friday notified the appointment of four district judges as new additional judges of the Madras High Court.

“In exercise of the power conferred by clause (1) of Article 224 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to appoint S/Shri (i) Ramasamy Sakthivel, (ii) P. Dhanabal, (iii) Chilmasamy Kumarappan and (iv) Kandasamy Rajasekar, to be Additional Judges of the Madras High Court, in that order of seniority, for a period of two years with effect from the date they assume charge of their respective offices,” the Ministry of Law & Justice said in the notification.