Writ appeal against Single Judge's order dismissing a petition seeking enhanced land acquisition compensation. The court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit due to the ten-year delay in filing the representation, which was beyond the three-year limitation period.
Writ appeal and connected C.M.P. 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.
WA No.730 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.03.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
WA No.730 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.7005 of 2023
... Appellants
Vs
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 28.11.2022 passed in W.P.No.31620 of 2022 on the file of this Court.
Page 1 of 4
WA No.730 of 2023
For the Appellants :: Mr.P.B.Sampath Kumar For the Respondents :: Mr.P.Muthukumar
:: Mr.P.Muthukumar State Govt. Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
This writ appeal has been directed against the order dated 28.11.2022 passed in W.P.No.31620 of 2022 filed by the appellants/ petitioners seeking issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to award a compensation at Rs.800/- per sq.ft., i.e., Rs.8608/- per sq.mtr as also additional compensation u/s 3(G)(2) of National Highways Act, Solatium and interest u/s.23(1A) & (2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the acquisition of their land comprised in New S.No.266/1C & 266/2C, Ayathur Village, Thiruvallur Taluk and District, measuring an extent of 270 sq. mtrs.
Page 2 of 4
WA No.730 of 2023
acquired and award was also passed granting compensation on 22.08.2011 and thereafter, the appellants/petitioners made a representation on 27.12.2021, namely, after ten long years, before the first respondent for enhancement of compensation. As it is beyond the period of limitation of three years from the date of the award, the learned Single Judge did not entertain the writ petition.
view of the huge passage of time of ten long years in making representation for higher compensation. Therefore, we are unable to find any error in the impugned order.
The writ appeal, therefore, fails and the same is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.7005 of 2023 is also dismissed.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 30.03.2023 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No
sra
Page 3 of 4
WA No.730 of 2023
T.RAJA, ACJ, and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
(sra)
To
WA No.730 of 2023
30.03.2023
Page 4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be entertained given that the representation for enhancement of compensation was filed beyond the three-year limitation period.
Whether there are merits or justification to interfere with the Single Judge's order dismissing the writ petition on limitation grounds.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sitaraman Ravi and R.Rajeswari
The Arbitrator & District Collector, Thiruvallur District
The Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer (LA)
The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India
T.RAJA
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
