Disposed

Saraswathi Ammal v. the District Collector Cum Arbitrator

Madras HC10 Jan 2022WP(MD)/322/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This mandamus petition challenged a notice issued by the District Revenue Officer directing the petitioner to participate in an arbitration appeal. The bench held that jurisdiction vested with the District Collector cum Arbitrator and directed the first respondent to conduct the proceedings personally without delegation. The writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector cum Arbitrator to conduct the arbitration proceedings personally, not delegate to the District Revenue Officer.

Saraswathi Ammal Vs the District Collector Cum Arbitrator — Madras HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.322 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.01.2022 CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.(MD) No.322 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.253 of 2022

Saraswathi Ammal

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector cum Arbitrator,

¶9

Office of the District Collector,

¶10

Trichy District, Trichy.

¶11

2.The Special District Revenue Officer,

¶12

(Land Acquisition under 'C' Section),

¶13

N.H.4 Way Extension Scheme, Collector Office, Trichy.

¶14

3.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, Trichy. ... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent in Arbitration Appeal in Na.Ka.No.C4/21957/2018, dated 15.12.2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to take up the Arbitration Appeal in Na.Ka.No.C4/21957/2018 and decide the Arbitration Appeal on merits in accordance with law by enhancing the compensation to the petitioner as per market value.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinayak

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.D.Ghandiraj Special Government Pleader

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The writ petition can be disposed of at the time of admission itself.

¶20

2.Heard Mr.S.Vinayak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.Ghandiraj, learned Special Government Pleader, appears on behalf of the respondents.

¶21

3.The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, questioning a notice issued, calling upon the petitioner to participate in an Arbitration Appeal. The said Arbitration Appeal is the third round of a proceedings before the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

1/3

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.322 of 2022

¶24

District Collector. The earlier proceedings had been set aside by the Principal District Judge, who had directed that the arbitrator shall re-hear the appeal in manner known to law.

¶25

4.The only grievance raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned notice had been issued by the District Revenue Officer and it is claimed that the District Revenue Officer has no jurisdiction, but it is only the District Collector, who is the arbitrator as provided in the Act and in the Rules. This statement is correct.

¶26

5.A direction is therefore, given to the District Collectorcum-Arbitrator, Trichy, who is the first respondent to conduct the proceedings and not delegate the same to the District Revenue Officer. It is expected that the District Collector-cum-Arbitrator, Trichy, will proceed with the enquiry, issue notices, call for explanations and conduct the entire proceedings in manner known to law.

¶27

6.With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.(MD)No.253 of 2022 is closed.

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

sji

¶30

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.

¶31

¶32

1.The District Collector cum Arbitrator, Office of the District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶33

2.The Special District Revenue Officer, (Land Acquisition under 'C' Section), N.H.4 Way Extension Scheme, Collector Office, Trichy.

¶34

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

¶35

2/3

¶36

W.P.(MD) No.322 of 2022

¶37

3.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶38

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-1299[F] dated 11/01/2022 )

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.322 of 2022 10.01.2022

¶40

RK(25/01/2021) 3P 5C

¶41

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

¶42

3/3

Saraswathi Ammal v. the District Collector Cum Arbitrator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saraswathi Ammal v. the District Collector Cum Arbitrator

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

Vijayakumar Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Shanmugam. S Vs the Tahsildar

P.Jeyabalan Vs the District Collector

Ganapathi.a Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Bollore Africa Logistics Vs v.O.Chidambaranar Port Trust

Gandhimathi.P Vs the District Collector