This writ petition challenging the viability of a layout formation was dismissed. The court held that the successor-in-interest could not retract from the 27 cents of land accepted for public utility in 1967 and that no statutory duty existed to dispose of the delayed representation.
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.
N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.12.2016
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
W.P.No.2904 of 2003
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order of direction in the nature of Writ forbearing the respondents, their men, agents, servants, subordinates or anybody claiming through the respondents from taking possession or interfering in any manner with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property belongs to the petitioners situated in the Layout in Survey No.716/18A and 18B in an extent of 27 cents in Paruthipet Village within Avadi Municipality Limits, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District .
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasan, For R1 : Mr.P.Srinivas, Standing Counsel For R2 & R3 : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Special Government Pleader. For R4 : No appearance For R5 : Mr.Ashok Kumar
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking to forbear the respondents, their men, agents, servants, subordinates or anybody claiming through the respondents from taking possession or interfering in any manner with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property belonging to the petitioners situated in the Layout in Survey No.716/18A and 18B in an extent of 27 cents in Paruthipet Village within Avadi Municipality Limits, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District .
Executive Officer, Avadi Township for forming a layout of house sites. His application was accepted and by the proceedings in LPDM No.114/66 dated 27.04.1967, the third respondent permitted Mannar to form a layout.
that they have given excess of land for public purpose. There is no statutory duty cast upon the respondents to dispose of the petitioners' representation. Hence, the mandamus as prayed for by the petitioners cannot be granted.
In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar
/true copy/
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Commissioner,
Avadi Municipality,
Avadi, Chennai – 54.
2. The Assistant Commissioner,
Urban Land Tax,
Poonamallee, Chennai – 22.
3. The Joint Director of Town Planning,
Chennai.
+1 CC to M/s. S. Srinivasan, Advocate SR 73229
+1 CC to M/s. P. Srinivas, Advocate Sr 73233
+1 CC to Govt. Pleader SR 73274.
W.P.No.2904 of 2003
ssk
sp/20/1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can grant a writ of mandamus for increasing the portion of land available for private possession.
Whether the successors of a layout originator can contest 30% public utility land earmarked contrary to 27 cents accepted.
M.Mangammal and others
The Commissioner, Avadi Municipality
The Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Tax
The Joint Director of Town Planning
E.Kuppusamy
S.Parasuraman
P.N. Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
