Partly allowed

Velusamy v. the District Collector

Madras HC6 Jul 2021WP(MD)/2919/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction under Article 226 to compel the Revenue Department to assign agricultural land to the petitioner based on a 1993 recommendation. The Court directed the first respondent to consider a fresh representation within six weeks without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and decide the land assignment matter within six weeks.

Velusamy Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.2919 of 2021

¶2

Velusamy

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.07.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.2919 of 2021

¶7

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The District Collector Thoothukudi District Thoothukudi.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti Thoothukudi District

¶12

3.The Tahsildar

¶13

Taluk Office, Kovilpatti Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1^st respondent to assign the agricultural land measuring 0.60.0 Hectares, comprised in survey No.618/1 at Sevalkulam Purampokku, Pandavarmangalam Village, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District in favour of the petitioner by acting upon the recommendation of the 3^rd respondent made in Roc.B6.173101/92 dated 23.03.1993.

¶15

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Bathra For Respondents :Mr.M.Lingadurai Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 03.02.2020, wherein, the petitioner has sought for assigning the agricultural lands in favour of the petitioner based on the recommendation made by the third respondent through proceedings dated 23.03.1993.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶19

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ made by the petitioner on 03.02.2020 and deal with the same on its

¶20

1/2

¶21

W.P.(MD)No.2919 of 2021

¶22

own merits and in accordance with law and shall convey the final decision to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the first respondent enclosing all the relevant documents and also a copy of this order.

¶24

This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶25

Assistant Registrar (Records)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

RR Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶29

¶30

1.The District Collector Thoothukudi District Thoothukudi.

¶31

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti Thoothukudi District

¶32

3.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Kovilpatti Thoothukudi District

¶33

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-21533[F] dated 07/07/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.R.BATHRA, Advocate ( SR-21571[F] dated 07/07/2021 )

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.2919 of 2021 06.07.2021

¶35

CM(CO) KB(14.07.2021) 2P 6C

¶36

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

¶37

2/2

Velusamy v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Velusamy 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

M/S A.V. Thomas Nagar Welfare Vs the District Collector

Rajathi.S Vs Tamilnadu Housing Board

Jeyanthi, Vs the District Collector

Seeniammal.R Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep by Its

Jayapaul D.S Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Gnanasekaran.K Vs the District Collector