Disposed

Gomathi Ramachandran v. The Special Tahsildhar

Madras HC3 Apr 2023WP/10286/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Court, upon consent of parties, disposed of a petition seeking to direct the respondent Special Tahsildar to consider a representation for compensation regarding land acquisition at Mamallapuram, ordering it to decide within 12 weeks due to non-consideration amounting to dereliction of duty.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2022 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve (12) weeks.

Gomathi Ramachandran Vs The Special Tahsildhar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

Gomathi Ramachandran

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, National Highway Planning Mamallapuram – Puducherry Road Extn. Scheme – III, Vedachalam Nagar, Chengalpattu. ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry in respect of the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2022 which has been received by the respondent on 17.10.2022.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C. Rajan For Respondent : Mr.P. Sathish, Additional Government Pleader

¶13

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

¶15

ORDER

¶16

With the consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶17

2. The petitioner herein had given a representation to the respondent on 16.10.2022, seeking for issuance of compensation. Since the said representation was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶18

3. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon them to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶19

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

¶21

4. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction

¶22

to the respondent herein, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2022, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and the rival claimants over the subject property, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

¶23

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶24

No costs.

¶25

03.04.2023

¶26

Speaking order/Non-speaking order Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶27

Sni

¶28

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

M.S.RAMESH,J.

Sni

The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, National Highway Planning Mamallapuram – Puducherry Road Extn. Scheme – III, Vedachalam Nagar, Chengalpattu.

¶34

W.P.No.10286 of 2023

¶35

03.04.2023

¶36

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Gomathi Ramachandran v. The Special Tahsildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gomathi Ramachandran v. The Special Tahsildhar

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

G.Krishnavel Vs Shankar

Tamil Nadu State Transport Vs The Special Deputy

K.Shankar Vs The District Registrar

T.S.Vasantha Vs The District Collector

G.Krishnamurthy Iyar (Senior Citizen) Vs The Commissioner

Chinnakannu (deceased) Vs the District Collector