Disposed

Mrs.Muniyammal v. the Arbitrator Cum District Collector

Madras HC2 Sept 2024WP/20150/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court of Madras directed the National Highways Authority of India and other respondents to resurvey disputed acquired land in the presence of the petitioner and pass final orders within eight weeks, without inquiring into the merits of the claim of excess possession.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 2 and 4 to resurvey the disputed land in the presence of the petitioner and pass final orders within eight weeks.

Mrs.Muniyammal Vs the Arbitrator Cum District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

Muniyammal

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Arbitrator cum District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Dharmapuri District.

¶11

2.The Competent Authority cum DRO, National Highway No.844, Dharmapuri.

¶12

3.The Special Tahsildar, National Highway No.844, Dharmapuri.

¶13

4.The National Highways Authority of India, Represented by its Project Director (NH 844), PIU – Krishnagiri, 259/1, Salem Main Road, Near KAKC Petrol Bunk, Krishnagiri ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶18

India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.06.2024, by revisit and re-survey the overall land acquired in S.No.188/3B situated at Jittandahalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Ramesh

¶20

For R1 and R3 : Mr.Arasakumar

¶21

Government Advocate

¶22

For R2 and R4 : Mrs.S.R.Sumathy

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents to consider her representation dated 20.06.2024 seeking resurvey of the land acquired in

¶25

S.No.188/3B situated at Jittandahalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, within a time fixed by this Court.

¶26

According to the petitioner, she is the owner of 62 cents of land in

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶30

S.No.188/3B situated at Jittandahalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District a nd the 2^nd respondent issued notification for acquiring 202 sq.meters of land in the said survey number under National Highways Act, 1956. It is the further case of the petitioner that at the time of taking possession, the 2^nd respondent had taken more extent than the one notified under the land acquisition notification. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the 2^nd respondent had taken 104 sq.meters of her land not covered by the land acquisition notification. Therefore, she submitted a representation to the respondents dated 20.06.2024 seeking resurvey of the land acquired from her and the same has not been considered by the respondents till date. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

The 2^nd respondent herein filed a counter affidavit stating that only an extent of 202 sq.meters of land in the above mentioned survey number was acquired from the petitioner and there is no proposal to acquire more lands. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that if additional lands are acquired, the 2^nd respondent would initiate land acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956 by following due process of law.

¶32

In view of the assertion made by the petitioner in her affidavit filed

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶36

in support of the writ petition, that the 2^nd respondent had taken 104 sq.meters of her land without any notification, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the respondents 2 and 4 to survey the above mentioned land with the help of jurisdictional Tahsildar in the presence of petitioner and pass f inal orders on its own merit, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37

With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No

¶38

costs.

¶39

02.09.2024

¶40

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No dm

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶44

¶45

1.The Arbitrator cum District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Dharmapuri District.

¶46

2.The Competent Authority cum DRO, National Highway No.844, Dharmapuri.

¶47

3.The Special Tahsildar, National Highway No.844, Dharmapuri.

¶48

4.The National Highways Authority of India, Represented by its Project Director (NH 844), PIU – Krishnagiri, 259/1, Salem Main Road, Near KAKC Petrol Bunk, Krishnagiri

¶49

5/6

¶50

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

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

W.P.No.20150 of 2024

¶55

02.09.2024

¶56

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

¶57

6/6

Mrs.Muniyammal v. the Arbitrator Cum District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Muniyammal v. the Arbitrator Cum District Collector

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

Sri Jaya Educational Trust Vs The Revenue Divisional officer

Chandra Vs the District Revenue Officer

Sundararaju Vs the Tahsildar

S.Nandhakumar Vs the Inspector General of Registration

M.Bharathkumar Vs Mr.a.Ilangovane

Jeyalakshmi Vs Joint Sub Registrar NO.1 (District Registrar Cadre)