Disposed

Sir M.Ct. Muthaiya Chettiar v. the District Collector

Madras HC18 Jul 2022WP(MD)/5816/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that since the petitioner complied with the impugned order regarding land revenue, the dispute over that payment subsides. However, the petitioner's pending application for assignment of non-assessed punja waste lands merits consideration. The Court directed the Commissioner of Land Reforms to decide the request on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to Commissioner of Land Reforms and Administration to consider the petitioner's pending representation dated 03.06.2005 for assignment of land within four months.

Sir M.Ct. Muthaiya Chettiar Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.07.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012 and

¶7

M.P(MD)No.1 of 2012

¶8

Sir M.CT.Muthaiya Chettiar Family Trust, Represented by Power Agent K.V.Kesavan, S/o.K.S.Venkatachalapathy, Farm Manager, No.1, Agraharam, Thiruvalampozhil, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk, Thanjavur District. ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The District Collector, Thanjavur.

¶11

2.The Autonomous State Officer, Accountant General Office, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶12

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruvaiyaru, Thanjavur District. ... Respondents

¶13

1/6

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶16

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the third respondent in Ref.No.Na.Ka.570/2002/A1, dated 20.04.2012 and quash the proceedings as illegal and arbitrary.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Prabu

¶18

For R-1 & R-3 : Mr.D.Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader For R-2 : Mr.P.Gunasekaran

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging an emergency memo, dated 20.04.2012 issued by the third respondent herein, under which, the petitioner's trust was directed to pay a sum of Rs.46,812/- for fasli year 1415 and another sum of Rs.71,170/- for fasli year 1417.

¶21

The learned Counsel for the writ petitioner has contended

¶22

that the impugned order has been passed without considering the ground reality and in violation of principles of natural justice. However, pending writ petition, the petitioner has chosen to comply with the impugned

¶23

2/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶26

order by way of sending two demand drafts on 11.07.2022 in favour of

¶27

the third respondent herein and the learned Counsel for the writ

¶28

petitioner has also produced the copy of the demand drafts and the postal receipt, under which, the demand drafts were sent to the third respondent. Since the petitioner has chosen to comply with the impugned order, nothing survives to be adjudicated in the present writ petition.

¶29

However, the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner had

¶30

contended that on 03.06.2005, the petitioner's trust has made a request for the assignment of non-assessed punja waste lands in favour of the trust which is running a school. The said application is still pending before the Commissioner of Land Reforms and Administration. The

¶31

petitioner requests that the Commissioner of Land Reforms and Administration may be directed to dispose of the said representation. Considering the fact that the petitioner has complied with the impugned

¶32

order passed by the third respondent herein, this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the Commissioner of Land Reforms and Administration that the request of the petitioner, dated 03.06.2005 seeking assignment of land may be considered on merits and in 3/6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶35

accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner's trust. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to give a fresh representation along with a copy of this order to the Commissioner of Land Reforms and Administration.

¶36

With the above said observations, the Writ Petition stands

¶37

disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶38

18.07.2022

¶39

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No btr

¶40

4/6

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶43

¶44

1.The District Collector, Thanjavur.

¶45

2.The Autonomous State Officer, Accountant General Office, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶46

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruvaiyaru, Thanjavur District.

¶47

5/6

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶50

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

¶51

btr

¶52

Order made in W.P.(MD).No.5816 of 2012

¶53

18.07.2022

¶54

6/6

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sir M.Ct. Muthaiya Chettiar v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sir M.Ct. Muthaiya Chettiar 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

B. Rangasamy, Vs the Commissioner

V.Pallapatti Islamic Education Vs the Secretary

N. Ganesh, Vs the Vice Chancellor

S.Veerasamy Chettiar Vs the Asst. Director

Kayal First Trust, Vs the Collector

M. Murugan, Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu