Disposed

R.Ranagnathan v. The District Collector

Madras HC25 Oct 2021WP/19092/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 challenging non-consideration of a representation regarding land acquisition compensation, the Madras High Court directed the respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders after an opportunity of personal hearing within sixteen weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 21.01.2019 and pass appropriate orders within sixteen weeks.

R.Ranagnathan Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 25.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶5

W.P.No.19092 of 2019

¶6

R.Ranganathan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The District Collector, Tirupur District,

¶9

District Collector Office,

¶10

Palladam Road,

¶11

Tirupur - 4.

¶12

2.The Special Tahsildar, (L.A.) Adi Dravida Welfare Scheme Tirupur,

¶13

Tirupur. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.01.2019.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D. Gopinathan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.V.Veluchamy Government Advocate

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.01.2019.

¶19

The petitioner's land measuring to an extent of 2 acres and 19 cents comprised in Survey No.572/2B for the purpose of Adi Dravidar Welfare Scheme, was acquired by the respondents herein. Subsequently, the first respondent referred the matter before the Sub Court, Tiruppur, for fixing the compensation. The Court below fixed the compensation of Rs.10/-lakh per acre based on the judgment and decree dated 07.08.1995. Aggrieved by the same, the second respondent/Tahsildar has preferred an appeal and the same was reduced the compensation amount of Rs.7/-lakh per acre. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation before the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondents to pay the compensation based on the

¶20

representation dated 21.01.2019, but the respondents have not considered on his representation. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶22

submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.01.2019 and dispose of the same within a stipulated time that may be framed by this Court.

¶23

Having regard to the limited scope of the prayer that is now sought for in this writ petition before this Court and taking into account the submissions made on either side, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation or the case pleaded by the petitioner in the present writ petition, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.01.2019 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar (CCC)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

gba/msm

¶29

¶30

1.The District Collector, Tirupur District, District Collector Office, Palladam Road, Tirupur - 4.

¶31

2.The Special Tahsildar, (L.A.) Adi Dravida Welfare Scheme Tirupur, Tirupur.

¶32

W.P.No.19092 of 2019

¶33

GPL (CO) PR (10/12/2021)

¶34

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

R.Ranagnathan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Ranagnathan 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

Martin Housing Private Limited, Vs The Secretary

M.Dhanabal Vs The District Collector

Dr.v.Sachithanantham Vs Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu

G.Sundara Bai, Vs The District Collector

Girija Janarthanan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

V.Sakunthala Vs The Member Secretary