Disposed

Ashok Gupta, v. The District Collector

Madras HC19 Dec 2023WP/26873/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed authorities to consider a representation regarding land acquisition compensation entitlement within 6 weeks, conducting proper inquiry and affording hearing to affected parties before passing orders on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directions to consider representation, conduct inquiry with hearing, and pass orders on merits within six weeks. No order as to costs.

Ashok Gupta, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 19.12.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN W.P.No.26873 of 2018

Ashok Gupta

...Petitioner

Versus

1.The District Collector, Chennai District.

¶10

2.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Additional Personal Assistant to the Collector, Room No.216, 2^nd Floor,

¶11

Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶12

3.The Managing Director, Chennai Metro Rail Project Room No.216, 2^nd Floor,

¶13

Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶14

4.The District Revenue Officer (DRO), Chennai Metro Rail Project, Room No.216, 2^nd Floor, Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶15

5.Revenue Divisional Officer and Land Divisional Officer, Egmore Revenue Division, Chennai – 600 031.

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶18

6.Mr.Sanjay Gupta

¶19

7.Mr.Mohit Gupta

¶20

8.Mr.Akash Gupta

¶21

9.Rajendra Kumar Gupta

¶22

10.Mr.N.Devendra Gupta

11.Mr.Tarun Gupta

12.Mr.Arun Gupta

13.MrsAnupam Bansal

14.Mrs.Latha Gupta

15.Mrs.Sudha Gupta

16.Mrs.Rajini Gupta

17.Mrs.Hema Gupta

18.Mrs.Beena Gupta

(R6 to R18 are impleaded vide Court order dated 08.01.2019, made in W.M.P.No.32955 of 2018 in W.P.No.26873 of 2018)

¶32

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to dispose of representation dated 01.09.2018 pending before the Respondents herein, within a time frame, as may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶33

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Kempraj For Respondents : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶36

R1,R2,R4 & R5	Government Advocate
CMRL-R3	: Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar
	Standing Counsel
R7 to R18	: Not Ready in Notice.

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a simple Writ of Mandamus to

¶39

direct the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein to dispose of the representation dated 01.09.2018, pending before the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein, within a time frame, as may be stipulated by this Court.

¶40

2. Mr.M.Kempraj, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted,

¶41

the concern of the petitioners is that even though the sale deed was duly registered by earlier vendors but the patta still is not in the name of the petitioners which is the basis to decide the Award and allocation of the compensation to the rightful owners. Hence the petitioners sent a representation dated 01.09.2018 to all the respondents herein requesting to kindly keep informed about the proceedings, correspondence, development and transaction involving the undivided shares in the properties and titles under S.No.3327 wherein the petitioners are also the co-sharers and entitled to receive compensation towards the acquisition of the aforementioned property in the name of the petitioners and they

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶44

are requested, not to disburse any compensation towards the property of the petitioners to any of the third parties. After receiving the said representation, the respondents herein neither sent any reply nor taken any action on the above said representation dated 01.09.2018.

¶45

3. This Court directs the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 01.09.2018. It is made clear that before passing order on the said representation dated 07.09.2018, the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein shall conduct enquiry and give opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the affected parties and respondent Nos.6 to 18 and thereafter and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in accordance with law.

¶46

4. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above

¶47

observations and directions. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

19.12.2023 (2/2)

¶49

Index :Yes/No Speaking :Yes/No Neutral Citation Case:Yes/No nst

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶52

To:

¶53

1.The District Collector, Chennai District.

¶54

2.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Additional Personal Assistant to the Collector, Room No.216, 2^nd Floor, Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶55

3.The Managing Director, Chennai Metro Rail Project Room No.216, 2^nd Floor, Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶56

4.The District Revenue Officer (DRO), Chennai Metro Rail Project, Room No.216, 2^nd Floor, Chennai Metro Rail Project Administrative Building, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.

¶57

5.Revenue Divisional Officer and Land Divisional Officer, Egmore Revenue Division, Chennai – 600 031.

¶58

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

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

P. VELMURUGAN,J.

nst

W.P.No.26873 of 2018

¶63

19.12.2023

¶64

(2/2)

¶65

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

Ashok Gupta, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Gupta, 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

Kannabiran Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Credai Chennai, Vs State of TamilNadu

Dr. S.R. Krishnamoorthy Vs the State of Tamiadu

A.Thiyagaraj Vs the Commissioner of Land Administration

Sanjay kumar Gupta Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M/S.Tamil Nadu Cement Corporation Vs Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Limited