Dismissed

N.S.Gomathi v. the Commissioner

Madras HC9 Oct 2017WA/2247/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed this writ appeal filed under Letters Patent Clause 15 against an order dismissing a writ petition. The underlying petition seeking land restoration and patta was withdrawn by the appellant before this court, rendering the appeal infructuous and unsustainable.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal dismissed as infructuous because the underlying writ petition was withdrawn by the appellant.

N.S.Gomathi Vs the Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 09.10.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

W.A No.2247 of 2013

¶7

N.S.Gomati ... Appellant/Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai -5. 2.The Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram. 3.The Tahsildar, Tambaram. ... Respondents/Respondents

¶8

Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P.No.24753 of 2013 dated 06.09.2013.

¶9

W.P.No.24753 of 2013 : This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to resotre the portion of the petitioners land coming under S.No.69/1 (Part) measuring an extent of 2040 sq.ft. in Pammal Village, Pallavaram, Kancheepuram District in view of the repeal of Urban Land Ceiling Act by making necessary amendments in the Revenue Records in due compliance with the Application of the petitioner submitted in Ref. No.1194 dated 12.7.2009 and further direct the 2nd respondent to issue patta in respect of the said property through the 3rd respondent.

¶10

For Appellant : Mr.M.Arumugam

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.A.Zakir Hussain Government Advocate

¶12

K.K. SASIDHARAN,J.

¶13

When it was made known to the learned counsel for the appellant as to how the appellant is entitled for a writ in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Commissioner, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Urban Land Ceiling, Ezhilagam, Chennai, to restore her

¶14

property in S.No.69/1 (Part) in Pammal Village, Pallavaram, Kancheepuram District, the learned counsel submitted that he is withdrawing the very writ petition with liberty to approach the concerned civil court. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶15

In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the appellant, we permit the appellant to withdraw the writ petition in W.P.No.24753 of 2013 with liberty to approach the proper forum for appropriate relief. However, we make it clear that the expression "liberty" should not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the matter. In short, it is for the concerned authority to decide the matter purely on merits and as per law.

¶16

In view of the dismissal of the writ petition in
W.P.No.24753 of 2013 as not pressed, nothing survives for
adjudication in this intra court appeal.
4. The intra court appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
svki
To
1.The Commissioner,
Urban Land Ceiling,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai -5.
2.The Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
Kancheepuram.
3.The Tahsildar,
Tambaram.
+1cc to Mr.M.Arumugam, Advocate, S.R.No.72034
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.72688

¶17

W.A No.2247 of 2013 SR(CO) CA(20/11/2017)

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

N.S.Gomathi v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.S.Gomathi v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Subramani Vs Minor.N,Caishinitha Rep by Her

Coimbatore Mahalakshmi Mandir Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

The Director General of Police Vs S.Dillibabu

A.R.Annapurani Achi (Deceased) Vs the Assistant Commissioner

A.Ammaiyappan Vs the State of Tamilnadu

E.V. Narayanasamy Vs the Government of India