Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking compensation for demolished property acquired by the Government. The Court held that disputed questions of fact regarding acquisition illegality are not triable in writ proceedings; the remedy is a civil suit.
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: 09.12.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
Writ Petition No.1583 of 2003
M.Haridoss ...Petitioner
-Versus-
Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to pay a compensation of Rs.7 Lakhs to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Maninarayanan
For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan Spl.GP
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents herein to pay a compensation of Rs.7 Lakhs to the petitioner.
In the result, this petition is dismissed as being
devoid of merits. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mk
To
1. The Collector of Kancheepuram District
Collectorate, Kancheepuram - 631 501.
2. The Deputy Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)
Radial Road Scheme,
Kelambakkam, Chengalpattu Taluk
Kancheepuram District.
3. The Divisional Engineer
Radial Roads Package-I
Transport & Machinery Division
Guindy, Chennai-600 025.
+1 CC To Government Pleader, sr 72978.
W.P.No.1583 of 2003 RMP(14/02/2017)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is the appropriate remedy for a dispute regarding legality of land acquisition and demolition compensation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Haridoss
The Collector of Kancheepuram District
P.N. Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
