Dismissed

N.Kunasingam v. the District Collectior

Madras HC5 Sept 2022WP(MD)/6299/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed writ petitions filed by N.Kunasingam and T.Alagesan seeking to quash a Gazette Notification and auction notice. The court held the petitions were infructuous as the notification sought to be quashed had already been struck down in an earlier order dated 21.08.2019.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed as infructuous; no costs awarded; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

N.Kunasingam Vs the District Collectior — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.09.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

¶6

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6148, 6149, 6214 & 6215 of 2018

¶7

1.W.P(MD)No.6299 of 2018:-

N.Kunasingam

... Petitioner

vs.

The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli – 627 009.

¶12

... Respondent

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the notification issued in Tirunelveli District Gazette Extraordinary No.4, dated 07.03.2018 and as published in the notice dated 12.03.2018 by the respondent and to quash the same insofar as item Nos.12 to 14 in respect to the lands situated in Survey Nos.1397 (part) Block – 1, 1397 (part) Block – 2 and 1397 (part) Block – 3 in Perungudi Village in Radhapuram Taluk and Tiruneveli District.

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader

¶18

2.W.P(MD)No.6364 of 2018:-

¶19

T.Alagesan ... Petitioner

¶20

vs.

¶21

The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. ... Respondent

¶22

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the entire records pertaining to the auction notice dated 12.03.2018 issued by the respondent and quash the same insofar as it relates to Serial Nos.12, 13 and 14 relating to the properties situated in Survey No.1397 (Part Block – 1), 1397 (Part Block – II) and 1397 (Part Block III), Perungudi Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand For Respondent : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

COMMON ORDER

¶27

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶28

(Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.)

¶29

The prayer in these Writ Petitions is to quash the Gazette Notification, dated 07.03.2018 as well as the notice dated 12.03.2018 issued by the respondent insofar as item Nos.12 to 14 therein, in respect of the lands situated in Survey Nos.1397 (part) Block – 1, 1397 (part) Block – 2 and 1397 (part) Block – 3 in Perungudi Village in Radhapuram Taluk and Tiruneveli District.

¶30

Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent fairly submitted that the Gazette Notification, dated 07.03.2018, challenged in these Writ Petitions itself was struck down by this Court as early as on 21.08.2019 in W.P(MD)Nos.6828, 7961, 7962, 7963, 8195, 10639, 10640, 10641, 10642, 10643 and 10644 of 2018. Pursuant to the said order passed by this Court, the District Collector, Tenkasi, has also issued the proceedings in Rc.No.M1/9212/2018, dated 02.11.2021 regarding refund of lease / bid amount remitted by the

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶34

highest bidder and subsequently, the bid amount was also refunded. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in these Writ Petitions.

¶35

Recording the submission so made by the learned counsel on either side, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶36

[R.M.D.,J.] & [J.S.N.P.,J.] 05.09.2022

¶37

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps

¶38

Note :

¶39

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.

¶40

4/6

¶41

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

¶42

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶43

¶44

The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli – 627 009.

¶45

5/6

¶46

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

¶47

W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶48

R.MAHADEVAN,J.

¶49

and

¶50

J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD,J.

¶51

¶52

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)Nos.6299 & 6364 of 2018

¶53

05.09.2022

¶54

6/6

¶55

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

N.Kunasingam v. the District Collectior

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Kunasingam v. the District Collectior

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

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S.Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax IV Vs Smt.Chandra Ramesh

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S.Suntv Network Ltd.

M.Antony Vs the District Collector

R.Moshi Dhayan @Pallavilai Vs the Registrar of Co-Op.

S.R.Ponnumani, Vs the District Collector