Disposed

R.Latha v. State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC7 Aug 2023WP(MD)/20557/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding the allotment of industrial plots. The petitioner, R.Latha, agreed to remit the plot cost at the revised rate of Rs.25,26,300 per acre and requested allotment in the names of her sons. The Court directed the petitioner to make the payment within eight weeks and the second respondent to issue the allotment order accord

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to remit plot cost of Rs.25,26,300/- per acre within eight weeks; second respondent directed to issue allotment order in joint names of petitioner's sons.

R.Latha Vs State of Tamil Nadu — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

1 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 07.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.20557 of 2013 AND M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013

¶7

R.Latha ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Tamil Nadu,

¶10

Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, MSME Department,

¶11

Secretariat, Fort St. George,

¶12

Chennai – 600 009.

¶13

The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.(TANSIDCO), Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Near SIDCO Electronic Complex, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.

¶14

The Screening Committee, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.(TANSIDCO), Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Near SIDCO Electronic Complex, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.

¶15

The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.(TANSIDCO), Tirunelveli.

¶16

The General Manager, District Industries Centre, Thoothukudi. ... Respondents

¶17

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

¶18

1/6

¶19

2 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶20

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 2^nd respondent's order of increasing and demanding abnormal price for the plots No.15A, 15B,15C, at TANSIDCO Industrial Estate in Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District in Proceedings in RC No.8459/IE-9/06 dated 11.10.2013 and quash the same and also to pass order forbearing the respondents from selling the said sites till the disposal of this writ petition.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramasamy For R-1 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, Additional Government Pleader. For R-4 : Mr.T.Sakhi Kumaran For R-5 :Mr.K.P.Krishna Doss

¶22

For R-2 & R-3 : No appearance.

O R D E R

Heard both sides.

The writ petitioner wanted to start an industrial unit in

¶27

TANSIDCO industrial estate at Kovilpatti. The respondent

¶28

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

¶29

2/6

¶30

3 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶31

Corporation had issued notification inviting applications in the year 2007. Originally plot cost was fixed at Rs.6,25,000/- per acre. However, certain procedural formalities could not be complied with. SIDCO took the stand that the price originally fixed will have to be revised. The rates were upwardly revised. That led to the institution of the present litigation.

¶32

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the

¶33

learned Standing counsel submitted that SIDCO is willing to allot a plot to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.25,26,300/- per acre. The matter was adjourned to enable the learned counsel to obtain instructions. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is willing to take the allotment at the rate of Rs.25,26,300/- per acre. He however stated that since the petitioner has become unwell, allotment can be made in favour of her two sons.

¶34

The learned Standing counsel however submitted that the plot cost may be remitted in the name of the petitioner first and thereafter representation can be given for effecting name change.

¶35

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

¶36

3/6

¶37

4 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶38

Taking into account the submissions made on either

¶39

side, this writ petition is disposed of as follows:-

¶40

a) The petitioner Mrs.R.Latha shall remit the plot cost in favour of TANSIDCO at Rs.25,26,300/- per acre within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶41

b) Along with such remittance, the petitioner may also submit a letter requesting the second respondent to issue allotment of the plot in the joint names of her sons.

¶42

c) The second respondent shall thereafter issue allotment order in the joint names of the petitioner's sons.

¶43

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶44

07.08.2023

¶45

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PMU

¶46

Note : Issue order copy on 09.08.2023.

¶47

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

¶48

4/6

¶49

5 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶50

To:

¶51

The Principal Secretary to Government, MSME Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶52

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

¶53

5/6

¶54

6 W.P.(MD)NO.20557 OF 2013

¶55

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶56

PMU

¶57

W.P.(MD)No.20557 of 2015

¶58

07.08.2023

¶59

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

¶60

6/6

R.Latha v. State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Latha v. State of Tamil Nadu

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

A. Balasubramanian Vs K. Elangovan

Kalimuthu Vs Mr.D.Ravichandran I.A.S.

Abiram Vs S. Kishore IAS

G.Shenbagaraj Vs State of Tamil Nadu

R. Venkatraman, Vs M. Rajesekaran

Salman Paris Vs Kumar Jayant IAS