Dismissed

V.Ramalingam, v. Secretary to Government of

Madras HC11 Dec 2020WP/9538/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking a declaration that they lapsed under the RTI, 2013. The petitioner subsequently sought withdrawal of the petition, which the Court permitted, dismissing the writ as withdrawn and closing the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

V.Ramalingam, Vs Secretary to Government of — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 11.12.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.9538 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶6

V. Ramalingam 2. Venugopal ...Petitioners v. 1. Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 9. 2. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, No.331, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. ...Respondents

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of declaration, declaring that the entire Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under section 4(1) Notification under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in G.O.Ms.No.447, Housing and Urban Development L.A.1(2) dated 21.10.1999 and Section 6 Declaration in G.O.(Ms) No.494, Housing & Urban Development Department [L.A.(1)] dated 06.12.2000 under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 shall be deemed to have been lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 i.e. The Central Act 30 of 2013 in respect of the petitioners' property situated S.Nos. 721/2A, 721/2B, 721/4, 722/1A1, 722/1A2, 723/2B, 724/2, 724/3, 727/1A1A, 727/1A1B & 727/1A2 to an extent of 0.01.0, 0.08.0, 0.06.0, 0.00.5, 0.34.5, 0.50.0, 0.36.0, 0.10.5, 0.31.5, 0.31.5 and 0.26.5 hectares in Kuthumbakkam Villae, Ponnamallee Taluk, Thriuvallur District.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sekar

¶9

For Respondents : Mr. M. Elumalai Additional Government Pleader

¶10

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

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

Mr.S.Sekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he has given a memo dated 08.09.2020 for listing the matter under the caption “for withdrawal”. Accordingly, the matter has been listed today under the caption “for withdrawal”. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, seeks the permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition.

¶13

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶14

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
1. Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 9.
2. The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
No.331, Anna Salai, Nandanam,
Chennai – 600 035.
+4ccs to Mr.S.Sekar, Advocate, SR.No.40266
+1cc to Government Pleader, SR.No.40712

¶15

W.P.No.9538 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 SR II(CO) KKV/15/12/2020 KKV/21/12/2020

¶16

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

V.Ramalingam, v. Secretary to Government of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Ramalingam, v. Secretary to Government of

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

A.kesavan, Vs The Chairman / Managing

C.Sunandhini, Vs The Commissioner of urban

K.P.Pandiyan, Vs The Joint 1 Sub-Registrar

D.Chitti Babu, Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and

Veeran Vs District Collector

G.Vasantha, W/o.Gunasekaran Vs The Chairman