Disposed

Subramanian.K v. The Competent Authority cum Special District Revenue Officer

Madras HC10 Nov 2023WP(MD)/6983/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by K. Subramanian seeking mandamus to direct the respondents to disburse compensation for land acquired for National Highways. The court noted that the compensation was deposited with the District Judge due to rival claims and left it open for the petitioner to approach the Principal District Judge to withdraw the funds if their right is esta

What did the court decide?

The matter was disposed of; the petitioner is directed to make an application before the Principal District Judge to withdraw the deposited compensation amount within three months if the rival claims

Subramanian.K Vs The Competent Authority cum Special… — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

K.Subramanian

... Petitioner

1.The Competent Authority Cum Special District Revenue Officer,

¶11

(Land Acquisition), Ramanathapuram District.

¶12

2.The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition ), National Highways, Karaikudi – Ramanathapuram, NH210 Expansion Phase- III, Thiruvadanai at R.S.Mangamalam, Ramanathapuram District. ..Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No. 1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders with regard to the disbursal of compensation for the land situated in survey No.56/6 Arunoothimanagalam Village, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, acquired for the purpose of laying National Highways Road on the strength of the documents produced by the petitioner during enquiry taken

¶14

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

¶15

myF

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

¶17

place pursuant to the memo of the 2nd respondent in e.f.Nj.ne.210/ myF -2/ m./2010 signed on 14/09/2020 as expeditiously as possible within the time stipulation as prescribed by this Court.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan, Additional Government Pleader

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to disburse the compensation amount to the petitioner for the lands acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956, within the time frame fixed by this Court.

¶22

The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the enquiry was conducted under Section 3-G(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956, by the competent Authority and the compensation amount was also fixed. The rival claim was made by two other persons viz., Karuppaiah Devar and Thirumathi Kaliammal. Since there was some confusion with respect to the persons in whose favour the compensation has to be paid, a decision was taken to deposit the compensation amount under Section 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act,

¶23

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

¶25

1956 and accordingly, a sum of Rs.3,04,456/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Four Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Six only) was deposited before the learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram.

¶26

In the light of the above development, it is left open to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram, seeking for withdrawl of the compensation amount. If there are any rival claims, it is left open to the learned Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram, to decide upon the same and permit the party, who has the right to withdraw the compensation amount. This process shall be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

This Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No

¶28

costs.

¶29

10.11.2023

¶30

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no tsg

¶31

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

¶33

tsg

¶34

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶35

¶36

1.The Competent Authority Cum Special District Revenue Officer,

¶37

(Land Acquisition), Ramanathapuram District.

¶38

2.The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition ), National Highways, Karaikudi – Ramanathapuram, NH210 Expansion Phase- III, Thiruvadanai at R.S.Mangamalam, Ramanathapuram District.

¶39

W .P.(MD)No.6983 of 2021

¶40

10.11.2023

¶41

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

Subramanian.K v. The Competent Authority cum Special District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanian.K v. The Competent Authority cum Special District Revenue Officer

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

Pushpam.P Vs the District Collector

Mohamed Ismails. Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Rajammal Vs Executive Engineer

Narayanan.R Vs the District Collector

S.Pandi Vs The District Collector

Palanisamy.R Vs the District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition)