Allowed

S.Narayanasamy v. The District Collector

Madras HC24 Nov 2021WP/25086/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.09.2020 and refer the matter to a Reference Court for enhancement of the land acquisition award within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the First Respondent to consider the representation dated 17.09.2020 and refer the matter to a Reference Court for enhancement of the award within eight weeks.

S.Narayanasamy Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.11.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

W.P.No.25086 of 2021

¶6

S. Narayanasamy ...Petitioner

¶7

¶8

1.The District Collector, First Floor, Collectorate, Kancheepuram – 631 501.

¶9

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram (District), Kancheepuram.

¶10

3.The Land Acquisition Officer, Tamil Nadu Urban Development Plan, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016. ...Respondents

¶11

Prayer :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 17.09.2020 and direct the land acquisition officer to fix the market price for the petitioner's property.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.M. Madhuprakash For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 17.09.2020 and direct the land acquisition officer to fix the market price for the petitioner's property.

¶15

Heard, Mr.M.Madhuprakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶16

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

¶17

The petitioner filed this writ petition for a direction directing the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.09.2020 to fix the market price for the petitioner's property, which was acquired under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, for the purpose of laying road. After passing an award, any person aggrieved by the award, within a period of sixty days from the date of the award, by an application to the Collector or the Officer to whom the case was transferred, require that the matter be referred for determination of the land value by the Court.

¶18

Considering the above, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner to refer the matter before the Reference Court for enhancement of the award on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar (CS-IX)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

Lpp

¶25

¶26

1.The District Collector, First Floor, Collectorate, Kancheepuram – 631 501.

¶27

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram (District), Kancheepuram.

¶28

3.The Land Acquisition Officer, Tamil Nadu Urban Development Plan, Alandur,

¶29

Chennai – 600 016.

¶30

+1cc to Government Pleader SR. No.61525

W.P.No.25086 of 2021

SSI (CO)

PR (12/01/2022)

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

S.Narayanasamy v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Narayanasamy 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Vijayamurugan Vs The District Collector

S.Velavan Vs The Inspector General of Registration

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

K.Lakshmi Ammal Vs The District Collector

M.Vadivelu Vs The Managing Director

S.Dhatchinesh Vs The Government of India