Allowed

R.Suguna v. The District Collector /

Madras HC5 Apr 2023WP/10573/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to forward her representation to the District Collector/Arbitrator. The Court, with party consent, directed the statutory authority to dispose of the representation on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 2 and 3 to forward the petitioner's representation to the District Collector/Arbitrator and dispose of it on merits within eight weeks.

R.Suguna Vs The District Collector / — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 05.4.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

R.Suguna

...Petitioner

1.The District Collector/ Arbitrator, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶11

2.The Authorized Officer-cumSpecial District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition), National Highways 948A, STRR, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶12

3.The Special Tahsildar (Unit-I) (Land Acquisition), National Highways 948A, STRR Unit-I, 20/1, Arulvajaram Complex, Prakash Nagar, Thinnur, Hosur-635109. Krishnagiri District.

¶13

4.The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, NHAI-PIU, Bangaluru, State of Karnataka.

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

¶19

forward the petitioner's application dated 02.11.2022 and the remainder dated 10.01.2023 to the 1st respondent/District Collector/Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 to determine the just compensation under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 in respect of the lands measuring 38,540 sq.ft comprised in S.F.Nos.658/2B3B, 681/2A1B, 681/2B1, 759/1A1, 759/1G1 and 759/1B, Moranapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manokaran For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.P.Sathish, Additional Government Pleader For Respondent-4 : Mr.Su.Srinivasan

¶21

ORDER

¶22

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

¶23

The limited prayer sought for in this Writ Petition is for a

¶24

direction to respondents 2 and 3 to forward her representation dated 02.11.2022 to the first respondent under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 so as to determine the just compensation. A copy of

¶25

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

¶26

2/4

¶27

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

¶28

the representation dated 02.11.2022 has already been sent to the first respondent/District Collector.

¶29

It is needless to point out that whenever a representation is preferred before the Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast on him to dispose of the same expeditiously. Non-compliance of such a responsibility would amount to dereliction of duties and this Court would be justified in directing the Statutory Authority to dispose of the representation within a stipulated time, in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

¶30

In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the first respondent herein to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 02.11.2022, if not already disposed of, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all the other persons who may be interested in the subject property, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

¶33

M.S.RAMESH,J.

¶34

RS/hvk

¶35

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands ordered. No

¶36

costs.

¶37

05.4.2023

¶38

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order

¶39

¶40

1.The District Collector/Arbitrator, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶41

2.The Authorized Officer-cumSpecial District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition), National Highways 948A, STRR, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶42

3.The Special Tahsildar (Unit-I) (Land Acquisition), National Highways 948A, STRR Unit-I, 20/1, Arulvajaram Complex, Prakash Nagar, Thinnur, Hosur-635109. Krishnagiri District.

¶43

4.The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, NHAI-PIU, Bangaluru, State of Karnataka.

¶44

W.P.No.10573 of 2023

¶45

4/4

¶46

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

R.Suguna v. The District Collector /

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Suguna 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shabira Bee M Vs The Sub Registrar

R.Sekar Vs The District Registrar

Jayalakshmi Vs District collector

G.Bharathiraja Vs The Commissioner

The Secretary/Chief Executive Vs a.Udayakumar

M.Durai Vs The State of Tamil Nadu