Dismissed

G. Venkatesan v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC6 Dec 2023WP/30452/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to quash a Section 4(1) acquisition notification regarding agricultural land. The Court held the petition as infructuous because the award under Section 7(3) had already been passed subsequently, rendering the challenge to the initial notification invalid. Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous due to the subsequent passing of the award.

G. Venkatesan Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.12.2023

¶4

Coram:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

G.Venkatesan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu

¶11

Rep. by its Secretary of Government Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Department Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009

¶12

The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition (Adi Dravidar Welfare) Omalur Taluk, Salem District

¶13

The District Collector Salem District ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the 3rd respondent notice issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 31/1978 R.O.C. No.78369/2000 dated 08.09.2001 published in Salem District Gazette on 20.09.2001 in S.No.133/1A, T.Maramangalam Village, Omalur Taluk and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mrs.Padmaja Mohan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.Ramanlaal

¶17

Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate

¶18

ORDER

¶19

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

¶20

1/5

¶21

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶22

The Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the 3rd respondent, notice issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 31/1978, R.O.C. No.78369/2000, dated 08.09.2001, published in Salem District Gazette on 20.09.2001 in S.No.133/1A, T.Maramangalam Village, Omalur Taluk and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the land proposed to be acquired is an agricultural land and it is the only livelihood of the petitioner and the Government can allot some other land, which is very well available.

¶24

Mr.Ramanlaal, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja, learned Government Advocate, submitted that since there was no stay in the writ petition staying the 4 (1) Notification and hence subsequent to the 4(1) Notification, 6(1) Notification was also completed. Thereafter, Award was also passed under Section 7(3) of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, on 04.03.2003 itself. The petitioner has not challenged the further notification and the Award. Therefore

¶25

2/5

¶26

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

¶27

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶28

when the Award is already passed, the 4(1) notification cannot be challenged.

¶29

In view of the submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate General and since the Award was already passed, the prayer of the writ petition challenging 4(1) notification has become infructuous.

¶30

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There

¶31

shall be no order as to the costs.

¶32

06.12.2023

¶33

ksa-2 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No

¶34

3/5

¶35

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

¶36

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶37

¶38

The Secretary of Government Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Department Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009

¶39

The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition (Adi Dravidar Welfare) Omalur Taluk, Salem District

¶40

The District Collector Salem District

¶41

4/5

¶42

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

¶43

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶44

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

¶45

Ksa-2

¶46

W.P. No.30452 of 2005

¶47

06.12.2023

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

G. Venkatesan v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Venkatesan v. the State of Tamilnadu

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

Famitha Banu Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Elumalai Vs the Tahsildar

S.Selvarasu Vs the District Revenue Officer

N.Loganathan Vs The District Collector cum Arbitrator

Mrs.C.Vishnudevi, Vs The Secretary

G.v.R.K.Raju Vs Project Director