Disposed

Perumal.S v. the Dist.Collecor

Madras HC16 Nov 2023WP(MD)/10325/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the laying of a road on the petitioner's patta lands. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from laying the road without proper acquisition proceedings and adequate compensation under the RFLAR&RA Act, 2013.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of on the ground that the road had already been laid. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Perumal.S Vs the Dist.Collecor — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021 and WMP(MD)No.7990 of 2021

S.Perumal

... Petitioner

The District Collector, Theni District Theni.

¶11

The Commissioner, Periyakulam Municipality, Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶12

The Tahsildar, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.

¶13

The Block Development Officer, Periyakulam Panchayat Union, Theni District.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents herein from laying road in the petitioner’s family property in Survey Nos.972/1, 972/3,973/1, 973/3, 981/1, 981/3 situated at Thamaraikulam Village, Periyakulam Sub Division, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District except by acquiring the land by conducting proper acquisition proceedings and to grant adequate compensation as per the

¶16

1/5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021

¶19

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr. Niranjan S. Kumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Jayapriya (R1 to R3) Government Advocate Mr.B.Saravanan (R4) Additional Government Pleader

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents from laying road in the patta lands, belonging to the petitioner.

¶23

2.When the matter was came up for hearing on 18.10.2023, this

¶24

Court has passed the following order:

¶25

“When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents on oral instructions submitted that road has already been laid.

¶26

2.When this Writ Petition was entertained on 21.06.2021, this Court had granted an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents from laying the road in the property belonging to the petitioner.

¶27

2/5

¶28

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

¶29

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021

¶30

3.In view of the same, the learned Government Advocate shall take a written instructions from the respondents as to whether the road has been laid and whether the property belonging to the petitioner has been excluded and thereafter, laying of road was completed.

¶31

4.Post this case under the caption “for orders” on

¶32

06.11.2023.

¶33

3.When the matter was came up for hearing today, the learned

¶34

Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 produced the written instructions received from the Block Development Officer. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder:

¶35

“ ,jid njhlu;e;J thjpapd; (Petitioner) Fwpg;gpl;l gl;lh epyj;jpy; rhiy mikf;f nfhl;lg;gl;l [y;yp fw;fis mg;Gwg;gLj;jg;gl;L mUfpy; cs;s Cuhl;rpf;F nrhe;jkhd 20 mb nghJ ghijapy; nkl;ly; rhiy mikf;fg;gl;L gzp KbTw;wJ. gzp KbTw;wikf;fhd gl;bay; njhif ghu;it 3y; fhZk; nray;Kiw thapyhf rk;ke;jg;gl;l jpU.mgpkd;dd; vd;gtUf;F mDkjpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ.

¶36

thjpf;F nrhe;jkhd gl;lh epyj;jpy; rhiy mikf;fg;gltpy;iy vd;gNjhL ,jd; tpguk; kDjhuuplKk; Neupy; cWjpg;gLj;jg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;gij fdpTld; njuptpj;Jf;nfhs;fpNwd;”

¶37

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

¶38

3/5

¶39

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021

¶40

4.Recording the above, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶41

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶42

16.11.2023

¶43

NCC : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No PNM

¶44

¶45

The District Collector, Theni District Theni.

¶46

The Commissioner, Periyakulam Municipality, Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶47

The Tahsildar, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.

¶48

The Block Development Officer, Periyakulam Panchayat Union, Theni District.

¶49

4/5

¶50

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

¶51

W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021

¶52

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶53

PNM

¶54

ORDER IN W.P. (MD).No.10325 of 2021 and WMP(MD)No.7990 of 2021

¶55

16.11.2023

¶56

5/5

¶57

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

Perumal.S v. the Dist.Collecor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Perumal.S v. the Dist.Collecor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarojini Pappa Vs the Under Secretary

Manikandan.P Vs the Commissioner

Rakkammal Vs the District Collector

Naganathan Vs the Principal Secretary

Mariammal (Died) Vs the District Collector

Tamilselvan Vs the District Collector