Disposed

G.Srinivasan v. The Special Tashildar

Madras HC21 Dec 2020WP/19386/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras restricted the petitioner's prayer to dispose of a specific appeal within six weeks. It directed the District Collector to decide the appeal on merits after a hearing without expressing an opinion on the merits of the writ petitions concerning land acquisition awards.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's appeal filed on 10.10.2018 within six weeks, providing a hearing opportunity.

G.Srinivasan Vs The Special Tashildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 21.12.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.Nos.19386 & 19387 of 2020

¶6

Mr. G. Srinivasan ... Petitioner in both WPs

¶7

¶8

1.The Special Tahsildar, National Highway Nos.67 & 45C, Nagapattinam – Thanjavur and Vikravandi-Kumbakonam-Thanjavur Section, Thami Nagar, Vilamal, Thiruvarur

¶9

2.The Competent Authority cum Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition), National Highway Nos.67 & 45C, Nagapattinam – Thanjavur and Vikravandi-Kumbakonam-Thanjavur Section, Thiruvarur

¶10

The District Collector, Thiruvarur. ... Respondents in both WPs

¶11

W.P.No.19386/2020: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent pertaining to Na.Ka.1027/2011/A./The.Na./Thiruvarur in Award No.11/2014-15, dated 02.02.2015 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to pass a fresh award in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶12

W.P.No.19387/2020: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent pertaining to Na.Ka.1027/2011/A./The.No./Thiruvarur in Award No.11/2014-15, dated 04.07.2018 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to pass a fresh award in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation

¶13

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

¶14

and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶15

COMMON ORDER

¶16

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petitions to issue Writs of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2^nd respondent in Award No.11/2014-15, dated 02.02.2015 and 04.07.2018 respectively, to quash the same and consequently directing the 2^nd respondent to pass fresh award in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶17

When the Writ Petitions are taken up for hearing, Mr. P. Sesubalan Raja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is restricting his prayer only to direct the 3^rd respondent to dispose of appeal filed by him on 10.10.2018, within a time frame.

¶18

Mr. D. Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the 3^rd respondent may be directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner, within a period of six weeks.

¶19

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the 3^rd respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on 10.10.2018 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

With these observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IX)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

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

¶25

Rj To

¶26

1.The Special Tahsildar,
National Highway Nos.67 & 45C,
Nagapattinam – Thanjavur and
Vikravandi-Kumbakonam-Thanjavur Section,
Thami Nagar, Vilamal,
Thiruvarur
2.The Competent Authority cum Special
District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition),
National Highway Nos.67 & 45C,
Nagapattinam – Thanjavur and
Vikravandi-Kumbakonam-Thanjavur Section,
Thiruvarur
3. The District Collector,
Thiruvarur.
+1cc to Mr.P.Sesubalan Raja, Advocate Sr.42843
+1cc to the Government pleader Sr.42640
W.P.Nos.19386 & 19387 of 2020
spd[co]
srg 08/01/2021

¶27

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

G.Srinivasan v. The Special Tashildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Srinivasan v. The Special Tashildar

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

M/S.Essar Industries Vs the Principal Secretary to

R. Krishnamoorthy Vs Mr. S.A. Raman

Mr.S.Chandrasekaran Vs The District Collector

A. Logananthan Vs The District Collector

S.Arumugam Vs v.Balaji

P.Saratha, Vs The Inspector General of