Disposed

Dolphin Construction v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC13 Feb 2018WP/32119/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the authorities to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, and conduct a proper enquiry adhering to the Rules, ensuring adequate opportunity of hearing before proceeding with land acquisition. Part of the record.

What did the court decide?

Directed authorities to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and conduct an enquiry ensuring adequate opportunity of hearing.

Dolphin Construction Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.02.2018

¶3

CORAM : THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶4

W.P.No.32119 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.35309 of 2017

¶5

Dolphin Construction CompANY

¶6

Rep by its Managing Partner Mr.R.Prabu
No.49, Battai Street
Velapadi, Vellore – 632 001. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep by its Principal Secretary
to Government
Highways & Minor Port
Fort St.George
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Collector
Vellore District
Vellore – 632 009.
3.The District Revenue Officer (L.A.)
Collector Office, Sathuvachari
Vellore – 632 009.
4.The Divisional Engineer (Projects)
Highways Department
5 th West Cross Road
Gandhi Nagar, Vellore - 632 006. ... Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the third respondent pertaining to the notice issued under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001 and published in the MAKKAL KURAL, Chennai Edition dated 23.11.2017 and quash the same.

¶8

For Petitioner : Ms.Subadra Marimuthu for Mr.P.Chandrasekar

¶9

For Respondents: Mr.M.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader

¶10

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

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

1. The grievance of the petitioner is that he owns a property comprised in T.S.No.1982/2, 1982/3, 1982/4A, 1987, 1986/2A and 1985/1 of Vellore North Village, Vellore Taluk, that this property was sought to be acquired by the Tamil Nadu Highways Authority. However, no notice under Section 15(2) of the Act was served on the petitioner as contemplated therein and that even the paper publication was made in the Chennai Edition of Makkal Kural.

¶13

2. Heard Ms.Subhadra Marimuthu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader. The third respondent has filed his counter. Today Mr.D.Thirunavukkarasu, Personal Assistant to Collector (Legal/Deputy Collector), Vellore District and Ms.A.Durgabai, Assistant Engineer (H) Projects, Tirupattur Sub Division, Vellore Division are present and assisted the Court. Their presence and assistance are recorded and appreciated.

¶14

3. Ms.Subhadra Marimuthu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner ably argued that the authorities have rendered the entire proceedings under Section 15(2) of the Act farcical and made a mockery of public notice through newspaper publication dated 23.11.2017 in Chennai Edition of 'Makkal Kural'.

¶15

4. Responding to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.M.Karthikeyan, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent irrespective of the petitioner's allegation as to the non-compliance or otherwise under Section 15(2) of the National Highway Act, 2001, has lodged an objection and her objection is yet to be considered.

¶16

5. Turning to the merit of the petitioner's contention, inasmuch as the petitioner has already lodged his objection, it can no more be contended by him that non-issuing of notices under Section15(2) of the Act has prejudiced his interest. The petitioner is well advised to participate in the enquiry to be held which shall be conducted as contemplated in Rules 5(2) and 5(3) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Rules, 2003, for which purpose the authority concerned is directed to issue a fresh notice on the petitioner at the address given in the petition, whereupon the petitioner shall participate in the enquiry. The authority concerned shall grant the petitioner adequate and effective opportunity of being heard in the matter. The authorities are particularly directed not to deviate from the procedures contemplated for holding enquiry etc., since this Court frequently encounters cases of procedural violations which lead to filing of such litigations before this Court.

¶17

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

¶18

6. The petition is disposed of as per the directions given above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar
ds
To:
1.The Principal Secretary to Government
Government of Tamil Nadu
Highways & Minor Port
Fort St.George
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Collector
Vellore District
Vellore – 632 009.
3.The District Revenue Officer (L.A.)
Collector Office, Sathuvachari
Vellore – 632 009.
4.The Divisional Engineer (Projects)
Highways Department
5 th West Cross Road
Gandhi Nagar, Vellore - 632 006.
+ 2 ccs to Mr. P. Chandrasekar, Advocate Sr.11364
W.P.No.32119 of 2017
NRJK(CO)
EU(23/03/2018 )

¶23

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

Dolphin Construction v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dolphin Construction 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Centre Fold Fashions Vs The District Collector

M/s.Gupta Garments Vs The District Collector

M/s.Sawan Enterprises Vs The District Collector

G.Kumaran, Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by

Asma Fathima Vs The Chief Secretry

K.Gurunathan Vs The State of Tamilnadu