Senguttuvel, v. The District Collector-Cum-
Case brief
What is this about?
N.Kirubakaran, J., This Court, by order…
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.
1
W.P.No.19992 of 2016
N.Kirubakaran, J.,
This Court, by order, dated 14.06.2016, passed in the above Writ Petition, directed the first respondent to pass orders on the claim made by the petitioner for compensation, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order, and directed the matter to be listed on 08.08.2016, for reporting compliance. Thereafter, it is seen from the docket sheet annexed to this Writ Petition that the matter has been listed on three occassions, i.e., on 08.08.2016, 22.08.2016, 29.08.2016 and finally, today. When the matter is taken up today, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 has produced the photocopy of the award passed by the District Collector/first respondent, in Award No.560, dated 23.08.2016, whereby, he has enhanced the compensation from Rs.27,67,185/- to Rs.43,27,000/-.
- Thus, the order and direction issued by this Court, dated 14.06.2016, has been complied with. However, Mr.Richardson Wilson, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent pointed out that, in para No.5 of the order, an observation has been made, stating that nothing has been paid to the petitioner, but the fact remains that the petitioner was paid a
2
sum of Rs.29,11,737/-. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that the said observation may be deleted.
- In view of the submission made by the learned counsel
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N.Kirubakaran
Coram
N.Kirubakaran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court