Dismissed

Mittalal.B v. State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC5 Jan 2022WP(MD)/48/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed this writ petition filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to pay land acquisition compensation. The Court held that the underlying Execution Petition was already pending before the Principal Sub Court at Kumbakonam, making the writ proceedings unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus directed against the respondents to pay compensation was dismissed.

Mittalal.B Vs State of Tamil Nadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.48 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.01.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.(MD) No.48 of 2022

B.Mittalal

... Petitioner

vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu,

¶8

by Secretary, Highways Department,

¶9

Tamil Nadu Secretariat,

¶10

Chennai 600 001.

¶11

2.The District Collector, Thanjavur,

¶12

Land Acquisition Officer,

¶13

Office of the District Collector, Thanjavur.

¶14

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶15

Land Acquisition Officer, The Revenue Divisional Office, Kumbakonam-612 001.

¶16

4.The Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu Highways Department,

¶17

Thanjavur District, Thanjavur-613 001.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 09.07.2021 and direct them to pay the compensation for petitioner's land 2608 sq.ft. in T.S.No.761/A2-671 sq.ft and T.S.No.762/A2-1937 sq.ft totally 2608 sq.ft in Kumbakonam Town Ullur Village, Thanjavur District, which was acquired on 09.04.1999 and for which the L.A.O.P.No.12 of 2006 was filed and awarded for which no payment was made due tot he subsequent Acts and also direct the respondents to pay the amount due as per the Decree and E.P.No.176 of 2018 in L.A.O.P.No.12 of 2006 which is Rs.35,39,729.45 (till 09.07.2021) and pay the balance amount after considering the applicability of Act 38 of 2019 for the petitioner's land.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.T.R.Subramanian

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheeshkumar Additional Government Pleader

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

E.P.No.176 of 2018 in L.A.O.P No.12 of 2006 is now pending before the Principal Sub Court at Kumbakonam. The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, inspite of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

1/2

¶25

W.P.(MD) No.48 of 2022

¶26

the fact that he had taken necessary steps and proper steps by filing Execution Petition. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶27

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

sji

¶31

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.

¶32

To 1.The Secretary, Highways Department, State of Tamil Nadu, Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Chennai 600 001. 2.The District Collector, Land Acquisition Officer, Office of the District Collector, Thanjavur. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Land Acquisition Officer, The Revenue Divisional Office, Kumbakonam-612 001. 4.The Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu Highways Department, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur-613 001.

¶33

+1 CC to M/s.T.R.SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-539[F] dated 06/01/2022 )

¶34

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-594[F] dated 06/01/2022 )

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.48 of 2022 05.01.2022

¶36

SR(CO)

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ GC(12.01.2022) 2P 7C

¶38

2/2

Mittalal.B v. State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mittalal.B v. State of Tamil Nadu

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

Reeta Vs the Block Development Officer

Sankiliammal Vs the District Collector

Sirajudeen Ali.a Vs the Sub-Registrar

Sukisha. K Vs the Principal Secretary

Balakrishnan Vs the Regional Passport Officer

Rajendran C Vs the District Collector