Disposed

N.Indirani v. The Principal Secretary

Madras HC4 Feb 2019WP/1013/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for compensation regarding surplus land acquisition, the Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation to the first respondent for fresh adjudication on merits before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a fresh representation to the first respondent within two weeks; first respondent directed to consider it and pass orders on merits within two weeks thereafter.

N.Indirani Vs The Principal Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.02.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.1013 of 2019

¶6

N.Indirani .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs
1.The Principal Secretary/
Commissioner of Land Reforms,
Chepauk, Chennai.
2.The Director of Land Reforms,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3.The District Collector,
Villupuram.
4.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Villupuram.
5.The District Collector,
Cuddalore.
6.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Cuddalore.
7.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Trichy.
8.The Tahsildar,
Kattumannur Kovil,
Cuddalore. .. Respondents
Prayer:

¶8

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner for acquisition of 83.45 Acres of the petitioner's mother property situated at Gunavasal Village, Kattumannar Kovil Taluk, Cuddalore District in accordance with law and stipulated time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

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

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Baskar For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai, Government Advocate

¶11

ORDER

¶12

With the consent of either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Petitioner preferred a representation dated 12.08.2016 to the Chief Minister, seeking to grant compensation to her, by declaring that the petitioner's land as a surplus land under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Payment of Surplus Land) Rules. It is further submitted that the petitioner is entitled for compensation for the surplus land taken from them, which was distributed to the landless poor.

¶14

The facts of the case is that the petitioner's mother Sowbackiyalakshmi Aayal possessed a vast extent of 86 acre 2 cent Punjai Land in Gunavasal Village, Kattumannar Kovil Taluk, Cuddalore District. During 1987, the Government declared it as surplus holdings and acquired 83 acre 45 cent under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Act.

¶15

The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Respondents 1 to 8 would submit that the petitioner has not chosen to file acknowledgment for the proof of sending representation seeking compensation. He further submits that if a copy of the said representation or if any fresh representation is made to the respondents, the same shall be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

¶16

Considering the above said submission, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation, the first respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶17

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS V)

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

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

¶23

rna/nvsri

¶24

¶25

1.The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai.

¶26

2.The Director of Land Reforms, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶27

3.The District Collector, Villupuram.

¶28

4.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Villupuram.
5.The District Collector,
Cuddalore.
6.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Cuddalore.
7.The Assistant Commissioner of
Land Reforms, Trichy.
8.The Tahsildar,
Kattumannur Kovil,
Cuddalore.
+1cc to Mr.R.Thamarai Selvan, Advocate, S.R.No.9487
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.10251
W.P.No.1013 of 2019
KAN(Co)
CS/25/03/2019

¶29

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

N.Indirani v. The Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Indirani v. The Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tmt. a. Balamani, Vs the Collector

J.Ramesh Babu, Vs the State

India Radiators Employees Union Vs The Registrar of Trade Unions

R.Kumaresan Vs The Regional Transport Officer

M.Chennakesavan Vs The Commissioner

K.M.Anbarasu Vs The Regional Transport Authority