Dismissed

R.Kothandapani, v. The Special District Revenue

Madras HC7 Aug 2020WP/7715/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner sought a Mandamus directing the transfer of the property patta. The court was informed that the respondents had already initiated acquisition proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. Consequently, the court held that the prayer could not be granted as the acquisition proces

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition and the connected Miscellaneous Petition were closed. No costs awarded.

R.Kothandapani, Vs The Special District Revenue — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.08.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.7715 of 2017 and W.M.P. No.8431 of 2017

¶6

R. Kothandapani ... Petitioner v. 1. The Special District Revenue Officer, Land Acquisition, Spicot, Sriperumpudur Project, Sriperumpudur, Kancheepuram District. 2. The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Santha Velur - Sriperumpudur Project, Sipcot, Irungattukottai, Pennalur Post, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. 3. The Tahsildar, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Sriperumpudur, Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to transfer patta in favour of the petitioner for the property bearing Plot No.65 in Sri Ambal Nagar, comprised in New S.No.414/2C, (Old S.No.414/6, 7) of Sandavelur Village, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Kanchipuram District, consisting of an extent of 3000 sq.ft. or 1 ground and 600 sq.ft.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr. R. Sunil Kumar For Respondents : Mr. M. Elumalai, Government Advocate

¶8

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to transfer patta in his favour for the property bearing Plot No.65 in Sri Ambal Nagar, comprised in New S.No.414/2C(Old S.No.414/6, 7), of Sandavelur Village, Sriperumpudur Taluk, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Kanchipuram District, measuring an extent of 3000 sq.ft.

¶9

When the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, Mr. M. Elumalai, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, on instructions from the 2^nd respondent, submitted that the 2^nd respondent had already issued a notice dated 05.09.2013 for acquiring the petitioner's land under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997.

¶10

Since the respondents have already initiated the acquisition proceedings, the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition, cannot be granted.

¶11

The learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the respondents would complete the acquisition proceedings expeditiously.

¶12

Recording the submissions made by the learned
Government Advocate, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
1. The Special District Revenue Officer,
Land Acquisition, Spicot,
Sriperumpudur Project,
Sriperumpudur,
Kancheepuram District.

¶13

The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Santha Velur - Sriperumpudur Project, Sipcot, Irungattukottai, Pennalur Post, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Sriperumpudur Taluk, Sriperumpudur, Kancheepuram District.

¶15

W.P.No.7715 of 2017 and W.M.P. No.8431 of 2017

¶16

AJS(CO) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ GMY(29/09/2020)

R.Kothandapani, v. The Special District Revenue

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Kothandapani, v. The Special District Revenue

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

Gnanambal Vs the District Registrar

D.Ravathi Vs the District Collector

P.Senthil Kumar, Vs the Tahsildar

Mr.D.Kamalakannan, Vs the Assistant Land

G.Subramani, Vs the District Collector

Mrs.R.Sudha Vs The State rep. by its