Disposed

P.Damodharan, v. The District Collector

Madras HC4 Aug 2021WP/16215/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposes of six writ petitions challenging land acquisition compensation rates. The Court directed petitioners to file fresh representations enclosing earlier ones with the District Collector and discharged the Collector with a duty to pass considered orders within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file fresh representations within three weeks; Respondent Collector directed to pass considered orders within twelve weeks on receipt.

P.Damodharan, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 04.08.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

WP.Nos.16215, 16218, 16222, 16227, 16230, 16232 & 16235 of 2021

¶6

[Video Conferencing]

¶7

P.Damodharan

¶8

... Petitioner in W.P.No.16215/2021

¶9

M.P.Venkatesan

¶10

... Petitioner in W.P.No.16218/2021

¶11

M.Vardharaj

¶12

Jeeva
P.Vijayakumar

¶13

Govindaraj

¶14

... Petitioner in W.P.No.16222/2021
... Petitioner in W.P.No.16227/2021
... Petitioner in W.P.No.16230/2021
... Petitioner in W.P.No.16232/2021

¶15

Valliamma

¶16

... Petitioner in W.P.No.16235/2021

¶17

Versus

¶18

1. The District Collector Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.

¶19

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

¶20

2. The Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer,
 (Land Acquisition),

¶21

 National Highways Authority,

¶22

 3 and 4 Lal Bagudhar Sastri Street,
 Periakuppam,

¶23

 Tiruvallur District.

¶24

... Respondents in all W.Ps

¶25

Prayer in W.P.No.16215/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 24.08.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
156 Square Meters of Survey No.26/6B6 and 26/6B13A,
Pattabiramapuram, Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land
acquired from the petitioner from Rs.2367 to Rs.8815.72 per
square meter.

¶26

Prayer in W.P.No.16218/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 25.06.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
240 Square Meters of Survey No.79/2, Pattabiramapuram, Tiruttani
Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land acquired from the petitioner
from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per square meter.

¶27

Prayer in W.P.No.16222/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 19.06.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
478 Square Meters of Survey No.6/3A2 and 6/3B2,
Pattabiramapuram, Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land
acquired from the petitioner from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per
square meter.

¶28

Prayer in W.P.No.16227/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 25.06.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
150 Square Meters in Survey No.6/7A, Pattabiramapuram, Tiruttani

¶29

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

¶30

Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land acquired from the petitioner
from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per square meter.

¶31

Prayer in W.P.No.16230/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 19.06.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
300 Square Meters of Survey No.85/1A, Pattabiramapuram,
Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land acquired from the
petitioner from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per square meter.

¶32

Prayer in W.P.No.16232/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 19.06.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
249 Square Meters land in Survey No.25/4A1B, acquired from the
petitioner from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per square meter.

¶33

Prayer in W.P.No.16235/2021: - Writ Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus
directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 27.11.2018 to enhance the compensation
amount by re-determine the market value of the entire extent of
452 Square Meters in Survey No.12/1A2B and 12/8B1B
Pattabiramapuram, Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District, land
acquired from the petitioner from Rs.2,259/- to Rs.8815.72 per
square meter.

¶34

For Petitioners
in all W.Ps:Mr.K.Sudalai Kannu
For Respondents
in all W.Ps:Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Government Advocate

¶35

COMMON ORDER

¶36

(1) Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶37

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

¶38

(2)A common order is passed in all the writ petitions as the
issue involved and to be adjudicated, is one and the same.

¶39

(3)The writ petitioners have given representations dated
24.08.2018, 25.06.2018, 19.06.2018, 25.06.2018, 19.06.2018,
19.06.2018, 27.11.2018 respectively in each one of the writ
petitionsaforementioned,seekingenhancementof
compensation. The said representations had been given to
the office of the District Collector at Tiruvallur
District.

¶40

(4) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that Acquisition Proceedings had commenced and the same also ended. But rather, unfortunately the compensation amount is highly disproportionate to the compensation granted to similarly placed persons whose lands, which were also similarly placed, were acquired in the said proceedings. This necessitated issuance of such representations by the writ petitioners seeking enhancement.

¶41

(5) But it would only be appropriate that a fresh representation is given enclosing earlier representations to the very same office, viz., the office of the District Collector, Tiruvallur District. Let me not go more deeper into the facts. It is also informed that the Arbitration Proceedings had not yet commenced.

¶42

(6) Be that as it may, within a period of three weeks from this date, let fresh representations be given by the writ petitioners enclosing earlier representations to the District Collector, Tiruvallur District/1^st respondent herein and on receipt of the same, an obligation is placed on the District Collector, Tiruvallur District to pass considered orders on the same after issuing notice and examining the records and if necessary, hear the writ petitioners within a period of twelve further weeks.

¶43

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

¶44

(7)With the above said direction, the writ petitions stand
disposed of. No costs.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

Assistant Registrar (CS-IV)

¶47

// True Copy //

¶48

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶49

AP

¶50

To:

¶51

1. The District Collector
 Tiruvallur District,
 Tiruvallur.

¶52

2. The Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer,
 (Land Acquisition),
 National Highways Authority,
 3 and 4 Lal Bagudhar Sastri Street,
 Periakuppam,
 Tiruvallur District.

¶53

+7cc to Mr.K.Sudalai Kannu, Advocate, S.R.No.38130 to 38135
and 38142

¶54

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.38832

¶55

WP.Nos.16215, 16218, 16222, 16227,
16230, 16232 & 16235 of 2021

¶56

RSI(CO)
B.VC(27/08/2021)

¶57

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

P.Damodharan, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Damodharan, v. The District Collector

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

P.Chandiran Vs The Tahsildar

R.Muniya Ammal, Vs The District Collector

M.K.Ramasamy Vs The District Collector

Mr. N.Raja Vs The Collector

S.N.S.Sukumaran Vs R.Lakshmi

P.Thirumoorthy Vs The District Collector