Dismissed

Ondipudur Trichy Road North v. the District Collector

Madras HC20 Dec 2023WP/6290/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held a writ petition for declaration of occupancy and compensation for land acquired under the National Highways Act not maintainable for a welfare society. However, it directed individual claimants to file claims with the Respondents to prove title within two months while leaving the petitioner's original prayer dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer for declaration and compensation dismissed; direction to individual claimants to file claim petitions with documentation.

Ondipudur Trichy Road North Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 20.12.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

¶7

Ondipudur Trichy Road North Side, Building Owners and Tenants Welfare Sangham, Reg.No.38/2010 Rep. by its Secretary Mr.R.Mohan, No.2071, Trichy Road, Ondipudur, Coimbatore 641 016.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

The District Collector, Collectorate Office, Coimbatore.

¶11

The Divisional Engineer National Highways Authority of India, Coimbatore.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, RDO Office, Coimbatore. ...Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Declaration, declaring that the petitioners who are occupants of the Natham lands lying in north of NH-67 on the stretch from Ondipudur Railway Overbridge to Ondipudur Old Post Office comprised in Survey Nos.138/2B2, 138/3B2, 138/4P, 233/5AP, 138/5A1P, 138/5A2P,

¶14

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

¶15

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

¶16

138/5BP, 138/8, 233/5A1P and 782 in Singnallur Village, Ondipudur, Coimbatore are entitled to compensation in respect of the said lands acquired under the provisions of the National Highways Act, and for consequential direction to the first respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2010.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.Bhagavath Krishnan

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.V.Veluchamy Addl. Government Pleader for R1 & R3

¶19

Mr.Su.Srinivasan for R2 ******

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This writ petition has been filed by the Ondipudur Trichy Road North

¶22

Side Building Owners and Tenants Welfare Sangham seeking to declare them as occupants of the Natham land and direction to the respondent to give compensation for the acquired lands.

¶23

2 The lands were acquired under the provisions of the National Highways Act. Therefore the writ petition filed by the Sangam, seeking declaration that they are the occupants of the acquired lands and for compensation, is not maintainable.

¶24

3 However, the claimants are directed to file claim petition before the 2/4

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

¶27

respondents and produce necessary documents to prove their claim. On such applications, the respondent concerned is directed to consider the same and after issuing notice and enquiry, based on the documents filed, pass orders on merits in accordance with laws. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner as Sangham is not entitled to get any relief sought for in this writ petition.

¶28

4 With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No

costs.

20.12.2023

Index: Yes/No cgi

The District Collector, Collectorate Office, Coimbatore.

¶34

The Divisional Engineer National Highways Authority of India, Coimbatore.

¶35

The Revenue Divisional Officer, RDO Office, Coimbatore.

¶36

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

¶37

3/4

¶38

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

¶39

P.VELMURUGAN, J.,

cgi

W.P.No.6290 of 2011

20.12.2023

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

Ondipudur Trichy Road North v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ondipudur Trichy Road North 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

Baskaran Vs The Chennai Metro Rail Limited

Mohammed Riyasatullah Vs State of Tamil Nadu

A/m.Sri Varadharaja Perumal Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Jayalakshmi Vs the Union Territory of Puducherry

M.Perumal Vs the District Collector

Matheswari Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer