Disposed

A.Vijayamurugan v. The District Collector

Madras HC23 Nov 2021WP/25028/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking proper land acquisition proceedings for electrical tower construction. It directed the Collector to verify land ownership via survey and conduct an enquiry with a hearing within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing the District Collector to verify the land status through survey, conduct an enquiry with a hearing, and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

A.Vijayamurugan Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.11.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

WP.NO.25028 OF 2021

A.Vijayamurugan

...Petitioner

The District Collector, Kancheepuram District Collector Office, Kanchipuram. 2. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Paalaru Thittam, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

¶10

The Executive Engineer, Lower Palar Basin Division, Kanchipuram.

¶11

The Executive Engineer, AVL, Kosasthalaiyar Basin Division, Thiruvallur. 5. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. 6. The Superintending Engineer, CEDC/South-II, 110, K.K.Nagar SS Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078. 7. The Superintending Engineer, CEDC/South-I, Anna Main Road, Chennai 600 078.

¶12

...Respondents

¶13

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

¶14

Prayer :-

¶15

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct proper land acquisition proceedings for the lands utilized for widening the river bank and for constructing a HT Electrical Transmission Tower more particularly in survey No.529/1, measuring 0.58.5 hectares or 1.44 acres, Kunrathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District by giving proper opportunity to the land owner for being heard / to make representation and to award suitable compensation for the land acquired in the manner known to law.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.Ashokapathy for M/s.Pass Associates

¶17

For Respondents For R1 : Mr.A.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader For R2 to 7 : Mr.S.Madhusudhanan, Standing Counsel

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct proper land acquisition proceedings for the lands utilized for widening the river bank and for constructing a HT Electrical Transmission Tower, more particularly, in survey No.529/1, measuring 0.58.5 hectares or 1.44 acres, Kunrathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District by giving proper opportunity to the land owner for being heard / to make representation and to award suitable compensation for the land acquired in the manner known to law.

¶20

The case of the petitioner is that his father owned land comprised in survey No.529/1 admeasuring 0.58.5 hectares, Kunrathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District by way of settlement deed dated 10.07.2013 registered vide document No.9656 of 2013. The said property has been settled in favour of the petitioner. After demise of his father, when the petitioner visited the property, he found that Tamilnadu Electricity Board erected tower and had drawn high tension electrical line in portion of the said property. He also surveyed the land with the help of the private surveyor and found that Public Works Department had encroached 50.8 cents of the petitioner's land and Tamilnadu Electricity Board had encroached 23.5 cents, in total 74.3 cents. His land was encroached by the Government Departments and the respondents did not follow any procedure to

¶21

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

¶22

acquire the same and no notice was issued to the petitioner or his father before erecting the tower and putting up compound wall. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representation before the Tamilnadu Electricity Board from the year 2019 and the same was directed to authority concerned for further action. However, no action has been initiated and hence the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶23

Whereas it is submitted that as per order dated 19.07.2016 by the TANTRANSCO, the erection of 230 KV EHT line has been approved and the work has been carried out and completed even in the year 2019. The entire high tension tower and line has been energised as early as on 30.11.2019 and the line is in service.

¶24

Therefore, whether the erection of tower in the land belongs to the petitioner or belongs to the Government has to be verified by surveying the land. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation before the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the first respondent is directed to conduct enquiry and, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and calling upon the report from the fifth respondent, pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.

¶25

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

lok

¶31

¶32

The District Collector, Kancheepuram District Collector Office, Kanchipuram.

¶33

The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Paalaru Thittam, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

¶34

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

¶35

3. The Executive Engineer, Lower Palar Basin Division, Kanchipuram.
4. The Executive Engineer, AVL, Kosasthalaiyar Basin Division, Thiruvallur.
5. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
6. The Superintending Engineer, CEDC/South-II, 110, K.K.Nagar SS Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078.
7. The Superintending Engineer, CEDC/South-I, Anna Main Road, Chennai 600 078.
+1cc to M/s.Pass Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.60369
WP.No.25028 of 2021
SJ(CO)
RLP(03/12/2021)

¶36

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

A.Vijayamurugan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Vijayamurugan 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.Muthukaruppan Vs The District Registrar

J.Selvi Vs The Inspector General of Registration

N.Selvan Vs The Sub Registrar

S.Velavan Vs The Inspector General of Registration

S.Akilan, S/o.Dr.K.K.Sekar, Vs The District Collector

Mrs.Sugunammal, Vs the Principal Secretary to