Disposed

P.John Selvaraj v. The Managing Director

Madras HC24 Feb 2023WP/5516/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an acquisition notification classifying petitioner land as government land, the Court observed that a subsequent clarification established the petitioners as patta holders. Consequently, the Court directed the Respondents to issue a fresh notice under Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, fixing a date for hearing to al

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to issue fresh notice and hold hearing for petitioners to produce ownership documents before proceeding further.

P.John Selvaraj Vs The Managing Director — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.02.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition No.5516 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.5527 & 5529 of 2023

¶7

P.John Selvaraj 2. P.IgnatiousRajkumar 3. P.Patrick Manojkumar …. Petitioners

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

1.The Managing Director Chennai Metro Rail Limited Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

¶10

2.The Special District Revenue Officer Land Acquisitions, Chennai Metro Rail Limited Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. …. Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to notification issued under Section 4(i) of Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 10 of 1999) subsection 3(2) of the said Act published in Tamil Nadu Newspaper Dinakaran dated 05.12.2022 claiming the petitioner property in Serial No.19 as Sarkar Poramboke (Government Poramboke lands) comprised in Block No.3, Survey No.88/3, St.Thomas Mount Village, Alandur Taluk proposed for acquisition as illegal and arbitrary and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

¶12

1 / 6

¶13

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

¶14

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶15

For Petitioner : Ms.V.R.Swetha Naidu For Respondents : Mr.Jayesh B Dolia, Senior Counsel for Ms.Rita Chandrasekar, Standing Counsel – for R1

¶16

Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader – for R2

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to notification issued under Section 4(i) of Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 10 of 1999) subsection 3(2) of the said Act published in Tamil Nadu Newspaper Dinakaran dated 05.12.2022 claiming the petitioner property in Serial No.19 as Sarkar Poramboke (Government Poramboke lands) comprised in Block No.3, Survey No.88/3, St.Thomas Mount Village, Alandur Taluk proposed for acquisition as illegal and arbitrary and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

¶19

The respondents issued notice under Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (In short 'the Act'), where the notice had been issued to the land holders. However, subsequently on 09.02.2023, an additional notification has been issued, where the property belongs to the petitioner at Survey No.88/3, St.Thomas Mount Village, Alandur Taluk has been shown as Ryotwari Manaivari Kattidam and the ownership has not been mentioned despite the petitioners being the owner of the property and

¶20

2 / 6

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶23

patta has already been issued in the name of the petitioners. Therefore, seeking the aforesaid prayer the present writ petition has been filed.

¶24

Reiterating the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks the indulgence of this Court.

¶25

Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the 2^nd respondent.

¶26

In fact the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent would submit that, insofar as the petitioners' land at Survey No.88/3 is concerned, it has been clarified that the land belongs to the petitioners and they are the patta holders. Therefore, under Section 3(2) of the Act notice would be given to the land owners ie., the petitioners by giving a date of hearing and on that date, let the petitioners appear before the 2^nd respondent, where the documents including patta which are available in favour of the petitioners can be produced, based on which further proceedings would be undertaken by the respondents.

¶27

The said stand taken by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

¶28

1^st respondent as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing

¶29

3 / 6

¶30

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

¶31

for the 2

¶32

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶33

for the 2^nd respondent is taken on record and in view of the same, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following order.

¶34

That there shall be a direction to the respondents to issue a fresh notice under Section 3(2) to the petitioners fixing a date for hearing.

¶35

On that date, without fail the petitioners shall appear before the 2^nd respondent and put forth their case by producing necessary documents in support of their contention that the land which is proposed to be acquired for industrial purposes, belongs to the petitioners.

¶36

On receipt of the same, after giving an opportunity in this regard to the petitioners, the respondents, especially the 2^nd respondent shall proceed to decide the same on merits and in accordance with law.

¶37

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶38

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

24.02.2023

¶40

½ Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order KST

¶41

4 / 6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶44

¶45

1.The Managing Director Chennai Metro Rail Limited Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

¶46

2.The Special District Revenue Officer Land Acquisitions, Chennai Metro Rail Limited Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

¶47

5 / 6

¶48

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

¶49

W.P.No.5516 of 2023

¶50

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶51

KST

¶52

W.P.No. 5516 of 2023

¶53

24.02.2023

¶54

6 / 6

¶55

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

P.John Selvaraj v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.John Selvaraj v. The Managing Director

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

L.Mahendiran Vs The Secretary to Government

Amutha Vs The District Registrar

Munusamy Vs The Revenue Divisional officer

Rahmath Beevi Vs The Special Deputy Collector

K.Radhakrishnan Vs The District Registrar

Karthikeyan Vs The District Collector