S.Kannan v. the State of Tamilnadu
Case brief
What is this about?
In a land dispute, the High Court rejected the petitioner's prayer for restoration of possession and immediate compensation but directed a superior police official to examine if the Special Cell investigated the matter beyond its jurisdiction.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:24.07.2015
Date of Reserving the Order Date of Pronouncing the Order 20.07.2015 24.07.2015
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. SIVAGNANAM
W.P.No.4661 of 2014
&
M.P.No.1 of 2014
S.Kannan ...PETITIONER
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu
Rep., by the Secretary to Govt.,
Home Department,
Fort St., George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Dharmapuri District,
Dharmapuri – 636 701.
4. Ashokkumar,
Inspector of Police,
Athiyamankottai Police Station,
Athiyamankottai – 636 807,
Dharmapuri District.
5.Kabilan, Inspector of Police, Anti-Land Grabbing Special Wing, District Police Office, Dharmapuri – 636 701, Dharmapuri District. 6.S.Singaram 7.S.Selvi 8.S.Ashokan 9.Sellappan 10.Durai ...RESPONDENTS Prayer :-Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to protect the life and property of the petitioner and his family after restoring his possession over an extent of 48 cents comprised in S.No.987/3A, Athiyamankottai Village, Dharmapuri District which has been illegally disturbed by the respondents 6 to 10 with the aid of the respondents 4 and 5 and also direct them to pay compensation of Rs.25 lakhs for violation of the fundamental right to life and property under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by considering the representation dated 16.12.2013.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a Writ Court can direct restoration of possession to the petitioner over the disputed property.
Whether the High Court can award compensation for violation of fundamental rights in the present stage.
Whether the Anti-Land Grabbing Special Cell exceeded its jurisdiction in investigating the matter and if a superior authority needs to review the investigation.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.Kannan
- respondent
The State of Tamilnadu Rep., by the Secretary to Govt., Home Department
- respondent
The Director General of Police
- respondent
The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District
- respondent
Ashokkumar
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court