Disposed

Thangamari v. the District Collector

Madras HC21 Sept 2023WP(MD)/19716/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning government land conversion, the Supreme Court directed that any alternative land offered to a respondent must account for the petitioner's rights as per a pending partition decree, ensuring the petitioner is not excluded.

What did the court decide?

That whatever alternative offer is made, it shall take note of the petitioner's rights as determined in the decree for partition, and the petitioner must not be excluded while compensating the fourth

Thangamari Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

Thangamari

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar - 626 003.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai - 626 101.

¶12

3.The Revenue Tahsildar, Kariapatti Taluk, Kariapatti – 626 106, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

4.V.Mariappan

¶14

5.M.Pahaathaal ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 from proceeding with the conversion of the Government lands bearing Survey Nos. 12/1, 12/23 and 12/25 in Keezha Uppiligundu Village,

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

¶19

Kariapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District, into any other classification and for assignment of those lands in favour of the respondents 4 and 5 under the guise of providing for the alternative lands to extent of 65 cents in Survey No.7/1A, 7/2 and 7/4 in Keezha Uppiligundu Village, Kariapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by considering the representation dated 08.08.2014 made by the petitioner to the respondents 1 to 3, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

¶20

For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.S.RA.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader for R.1 to R.3

¶21

Ms.Vijayakumari Natarajan for R.4 and R.5

¶22

ORDER

¶23

None appears for the writ petitioner. Heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the contesting private respondents.

¶24

The local body laid road on the patta land. It belonged to

¶25

family of the petitioner and the fourth respondent. It is not as if the fourth respondent was the exclusive owner. The local body

¶26

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

¶27

2/4

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

¶29

proposed to give alternative cite. The petitioner's case is that his

¶30

rights cannot be ignored. It is seen that a partition suit was filed and

¶31

decree was passed and that appeal is presently pending.

¶32

I make it clear that whatever alternative offer is made, it will take note of the rights of the petitioner as determined in the decree for partition. In other words, the petitioner may not be excluded while compensating the fourth respondent for having laid the road on the patta land.

¶33

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

21.09.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA

¶35

¶36

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar - 626 003.

¶37

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

¶38

3/4

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

¶40

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶41

MGA

¶42

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai - 626 101.

¶43

3.The Revenue Tahsildar, Kariapatti Taluk, Kariapatti – 626 106, Virudhunagar District.

¶44

W.P.(MD)No.19716 of 2014

¶45

21.09.2023

¶46

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

¶47

4/4

Thangamari v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thangamari 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Krishna Kumar, Vs the Asst. Executive Engineer

R. Rani Rajalingam, Vs the District Collector

N.A. Manjammal Polytechnic Vs the Assistant Engineer

P.B.Balasubramaniam Vs The Secretary

Swamiji, Vs the Chief Secretary

M. Gobinathan, Vs the National Highways