Disposed

Kaliamoorthy v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC1 Feb 2018WP/29726/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three writ petitions sought a direction under Article 226 for the issue of Free House Site Patta on poramboke land. The Court, hearing counsel, directed petitioners to submit individual representations instead of a joint one and remanded the matter to the Collector with specific timelines, disposing of petitions without addressing merits.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioners to submit individual representations within two weeks; directing the first respondent to pass orders after providing a hearing within twelve weeks.

Kaliamoorthy Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:01.02.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶2

W.P.Nos.29726 to 29728 of 2013

¶3

Kaliyamoorthy ..Petitioner in W.P.29726/13 V.Chanthirakasu ..Petitioner in W.P.29727/13 Ashothai ..Petitioner in W.P.29728/13

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by the District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

¶6

The Tahsildar, Tittagudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. .. Respondents in all the Wps

¶7

Common Prayer: The Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners representation dated 19.07.2013 and issue Free House Site Patta to the petitioners poramboke land situated at Navalur village, Thittagudi Taluk, Cuddalore District, bearing Survey No.52, measuring about 3 cents as per the G.O.Ms.No.142 dated 23.05.2013 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Chennai-9.

¶8

For Petitioners in all WPs : Mr.M.Velmurugan

¶9

For Respondents in all WPs : Mr.N.Manikandan

¶10

Government Advocate

¶11

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶12

The prayer sought for in these writ petitions is to issue a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 19.07.2013 and issue Free Housing Patta to the petitioners in Navalur village, Thittagudi Taluk, Cuddalore District as per G.O.Ms.142 dated 23.05.2013.

¶13

Heard Mr.M.Velmurugan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.N.Manikandan, learned Government Advocate, for the respondents and perused the records.

¶14

The learned Government Advocate submitted that the petitioners have not produced any proof for submission of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ joint representation and if a fresh representation is given,

¶15

the first respondent is ready to consider the same in accordance with law.

¶16

In view of the limited prayer sought for in these writ petitions and the submission of the learned Government Advocate, this Court without going into the merits of this case, directs the petitioners to submit individual representations to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such receipt, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders on the said representations after providing an opportunity to all the necessary parties concerned within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.

¶17

With the above directions, these writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs.

¶18

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rpl
To
1. The District Collector,
Cuddalore District,
Cuddalore.
2. The Tahsildar,
Tittagudi Taluk,
Cuddalore District.
+1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.8483
KJI(CO)
sm:20.2.2018
W.P.No.29726 to
29728 of 2013

¶19

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

Kaliamoorthy v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaliamoorthy v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Gopinath, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Mr.Rajendra Kumar Gupta Vs the Deputy Commissioner

R.Nallaiyan Vs the Tahsildar

T.Nagammal, Vs the Commissioner

Arulnathan Vs the District Collector

Sheik Kaleem, Vs the District Collector