A writ appeal filed against an order dismissing a writ petition regarding the demolition of unauthorized occupation of land. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no infirmity in the lower court's order which granted liberty to approach the competent forum.
The writ appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.10.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
V.R.Mariappan .. Appellant
vs
The Project Director, NHAI, PIU Kancheepuram, National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West-600 045.
.. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 22.4.2022 passed in W.P.No.1213 of 2022.
For the Appellant : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar for M/s.K.M.Vijayan Associates For the Respondents : Mr.Su.Srinivasan
____________ Page 1 of 6_
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 22.4.2022 passed in W.P.No.1213 of 2022, wherein, in paragraphs 4 and 5, the learned Single Judge has specifically observed as under:
“5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioners properties were demolished only after the due process of law. However, petitioner may approach the competent form for claiming their grievance.
6. Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, the present writ petitions are closed. In view of the above submissions, the prayer sought by petitioners in the present writ petition cannot be granted. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners, to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.”
Page 2 of 6
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
runs counter to the averment made in paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, wherein the appellant stated that “ respondent all of a sudden on 18.12.2020 affixed a notice directing the petitioner to remove the unauthorised occupation under Section 26 of the Control of National Highways Act, 2002 ”. Upon receipt of the said notice, the appellant has also given reply dated 31.12.2021.
____________ Page 3 of 6_
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
the submission of learned counsel for the respondent that only after following due process of law the demolition was effected, the learned Single Judge has closed the writ petition with liberty to the appellant to approach the competent forum, if he is aggrieved.
appellant to work out his remedy in the manner known to law, the course open to the appellant is only to approach the competent forum. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge.
be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.17746 of 2022 is
closed.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.K.K., J.) 19.10.2022
Index : Yes/No bbr
____________ Page 4 of 6_
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
To:
The Project Director, NHAI, PIU Kancheepuram, National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West-600 045.
Page 5 of 6
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
T.RAJA, ACJ. AND D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.
bbr
W.A.No.2321 of 2022
19.10.2022
____________ Page 6 of 6_
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order of the Single Judge closing the writ petition with liberty to approach the competent forum was liable to be set aside.
Whether there was an infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge given the alleged lack of opportunity before demolition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.R.Mariappan
The Project Director, NHAI, PIU Kancheepuram
T.Raja
D.Krishnakumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
