The State sought review of the 2002 dismissal of its writ appeal challenging land acquisition proceedings. The Court noted the earlier order had granted liberty to re-initiate acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act. With the issues stale after 21 years of pendency, the review was dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003 against W.A.No.2019 of 2000
1.The District Collector, Villupuram Ramasamy Padayachiar District, Villupuram.
3.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai.
...Petitioners
Vs.
1.N.Venkatachalam
2.N.Pandurangan
1/5
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003
3.N.Kannan
... Respondents
PRAYER : Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of C.P.C. praying to review the order dated 19.02.2002 passed in W.A.No.2019 of 2000.
For Petitioners : Mr.T.Chandra Sekaran
ORDER
(Judgement of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
The review application has been instituted to review the order dated 19.02.2002 passed by this Court dismissing the writ appeal in W.A.No.2019 of 2000.
2.The Division Bench, while passing final order in Writ Appeal No.2019 of 2000, dated 19.02.2002, made an observation that the judgement passed in the Writ Appeal shall not preclude the respondentGovernment from re-initiating the land acquisition proceedings by following
2/5
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003
the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act. The liberty was
granted to initiate action within two months.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(S.M.S.J.,) (C.K.J.,) 24.07.2024
Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No (sha)
3/5
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003
To
1.The District Collector, Villupuram Ramasamy Padayachiar District, Villupuram.
3.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai.
4/5
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
(sha)
Review Application (Civil) No.77 of 2003 against W.A.No.2019 of 2000
24.07.2024
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the State's review against the dismissal of its writ appeal should be entertained after a delay of about 21 years during which the land acquisition issues lost relevance.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The District Collector, Villupuram Ramasamy Padayachiar District, Villupuram
The Special Tahsildar, (Adi Dravidar Welfare) Kallakurichi
The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department
N.Venkatachalam
N.Pandurangan
N.Kannan
S.M.Subramaniam
C.Kumarappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
