Dismissed

Kalavathi v. The District Collector

Madras HC12 Dec 2018WP/32090/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged acquisition of their property alleging lack of due process. Respondents clarified encroachments on road margins require measurement and demarcation per CRIDP proposal. Court dismissed apprehension of unlawful eviction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; encroachments, if found post-demarcation, must be removed by appropriate authority following due process.

Kalavathi Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated: 12.12.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.32090 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.37341 & 37343 of 2018

¶6

1.Mrs.Kalavathi 2.Mrs.Kanchana ... Petitioners -Versus1.The District Collector, O/o The Collectorate, Namakkal District.

¶7

2.The District Revenue Officer / Land Acquisition Officer, Namakkal.

¶8

3.The Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu State Highways Department, Namakkal District.

¶9

4.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu State Highways Department, Tiruchengode, Namakkal District.

¶10

5.The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu State Highways Department, Pallipalayam, Namakkal District.

¶11

6.The Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), District Collector Office Campus, Namakkal District.

¶12

7.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchengode, Namakkal District. ... Respondents

¶13

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from acquiring the petitioners' property comprised in No.20, Kokkarayanpettai Village, Natham Old S.No.142/1 (part), New S.No.142/11, bearing D.Nos.6/187, 6/188, 6/189,

¶14

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

¶15

6/189-1 admeasuring to an extent of 0.0063.0 square meter without due process of law,on the basis of the petitioners' representation dated 29.11.2018.

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.Viswanathan.S. for M/s.Dass and Viswa Associates

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.D.Raja, Additional Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from acquiring the petitioners' property comprised in No.20, Kokkarayanpettai Village, Natham Old S.No.142/1 (part), New S.No.142/11, bearing D.Nos.6/187, 6/188, 6/189, 6/189-1 admeasuring to an extent of 0.0063.0 square meter without following the due process of law.

¶20

According to the petitioners, the 1st petitioner and the 2nd petitioner who is none other than the wife of the late brother of the 1st petitioner are the absolute owner of the property in question by way of inheritance and they have been possession and enjoyment of the property by putting up constructions on the same and letting out a portion of the building for rent for commercial purpose. While so, without any notice to him, the respondents 3 to 5 have been taking steps to evict him from the property unlawfully. Hence, this writ petition.

¶21

Earlier notice was ordered to the respondents. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Addl. Government Pleader, on instructions submitted that there are lot of encroachments on the road margin and since the Highways authorities had a proposal to construct storm water drainage on the right side of Tiruchengode - Kokkarayanpettai Road between 14/0-14/4 km under CRIDP 2018-19, on the request made by the Assistant Engineer, Highways Department, Pallipalayam, the revenue authorities have been taking steps to measure and demarcate the road. According to the learned Additional Government Pleader, after measurement and demarcation, if any encroachments are found, the same would be removed by following due process of law. The said statement is recorded.

¶22

In the light of the submissions made by the learned Additional Government Pleader this court is of the view that the apprehension of the petitioners that they would be evicted unlawfully is misconceived. Recording the statement of the learned Additional Government Pleader, this writ petition is dismissed. However, after measurement and demarcation of the

¶23

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

¶24

road, if it is found that there is encroachment on the road / road margin, it is always open to the appropriate authority to remove the encroachments by following the due process of law. No costs. Consequently, connected WMP is closed.

¶25

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kmk
To
1.The District Collector, O/o The Collectorate, Namakkal
District.
2.The District Revenue Officer / Land Acquisition Officer,
Namakkal.
3.The Divisional Engineer,Tamil Nadu State Highways Department,
Namakkal District.
4.The Assistant Divisional Engineer,Tamil Nadu State Highways
Department, Tiruchengode, Namakkal District.
5.The Assistant Engineer,Tamil Nadu State Highways Department,
Pallipalayam, Namakkal District.
6.The Tahsildar (Land Acquisition),District Collector Office
Campus,
Namakkal District.
7.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o the Revenue Divisional
Officer,
Tiruchengode, Namakkal District.
+1 cc to M/s.Dass & Viswa Associates, Advocate Sr.No.86136
+1 cc to The Government Pleader, Sr.No.86260

¶26

W.P.No.32090 of 2018 RK(CO) CSL/29.01.2019

¶27

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

Kalavathi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalavathi v. The District Collector

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

K.Ayyadurai, S/o.Krishnan Vs The Tamil Nadu State

S.Vaikundarajan Vs the Union of India

M/s.India Infoline Finance Ltd. Vs The Regional Transport Officer

K.Subramani Vs The Collector

K.S.Ganesan Vs The District Collector

K.Matheswaran Vs The Collector