Disposed

M.L.Sampath Kumaran v. the Divisional Engineer (Highways)(C and M)

Madras HC19 Mar 2024WP/4287/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought removal of encroachments on patta land taken for road expansion. Noting a dispute over the extent taken and pending civil suits over title, the court directed the Tahsildar Guindy to survey the land in the petitioner's presence, calculate compensation under the new Land Acquisition Act, and deposit it in credit of a pending civil suit.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued: Tahsildar Guindy to measure the land taken in the petitioner's presence and deposit calculated compensation in credit of O.S.No.5122 of 2015 within twelve weeks; no costs.

M.L.Sampath Kumaran Vs the Divisional Engineer (Highways)(C… — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 19.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

M.L.Sampath Kumaran

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Divisional Engineer (Highways)(C and M), Chennai City Roads Division, Chennai-600 015.

¶11

The Asst.Divisional Engineer (Highways) (C and M), Chennai City Roads Sub-Division, Chennai - 600015.

¶12

(previous R1 & R2 deleted from the array of respondents and amended by arraying R3 & R4 as earlier R1 & R2 vide order dated 12.07.2023 made in WMP.19974/2023 in WP.4287/2019 by SVNJ, KRSJ)

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

Prayer :- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to remove the encroachments made in the property belonging to the petitioner situated at Corp.D.N.100 Mount Road, Madras (Guindy) bearing corporation No.31/D-4 comprised in Patta No.1, T.S.Block-4, Survey-4 based on the representation of the petitioner dated 29.11.2018

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Viswanathan

¶16

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

¶17

1/6

¶18

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader, (for R1 & R2, deleted from array of respondents 3 and 4 as per court order dated 12.07.2023)

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

(Order of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶22

The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents

¶23

1 and 2 (after amendment vide order dated 12.07.2023 made in WMP.19974/2023 in WP.4287/2019 by SVNJ, KRSJ), to remove the encroachments made in the property belonging to the petitioner situated at Corp.D.N.100 Mount Road, Madras (Guindy) bearing corporation No.31/D-4 comprised in Patta No.1, T.S.Block-4, Survey-4 based on the representation of the petitioner dated 29.11.2018.

¶24

The grievances of the writ petitioner is that the patta land owned by him is encroached upon by the respondents for widening the road.

¶25

The learned Special Government Pleader, Mr.A.Selvendran would submit that a portion of the property measuring about 202 sq.ft. was taken for road expansion project and the authorities are ready and willing to settle the compensation for the said portion.

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

¶29

The petitioner would submit that the portion of his land encroached by the respondents are measuring about 410 sq.ft. Therefore, the measurement has not been properly taken.

¶30

In view of the controversy regarding the measurement of the property taken by the respondents for road expansion, we direct the Tahsildar Guindy, to survey the portion of the land, taken possession for road expansion from the petitioner and accordingly, calculate the compensation as per the new Land Acquisition Act and deposit the same in the credit of O.S.No.5122 of 2015, on the file of 4 th Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. We have directed the respondents to deposit the compensation in the credit of the civil suit, in view of the fact that civil dispute exist between the parties regarding the title and ownership.

¶31

It is brought to the notice of this Court that yet another civil suit is pending in O.S.No.2258 of 2019 on the file of the 4th Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶32

It is made clear that measurement regarding the land, taken

¶33

possession for road expansion by the petitioner, is to be made by the

¶34

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

¶35

3/6

¶36

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

¶37

Tahsildar in the presence of the petitioner. The date and time of measurement shall be intimated to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the authorities to complete the measurement.

¶38

Since the procedures as not contemplated under the Land Acquisition proceedings were followed, and how the parties have agreed to receive compensation by negotiation, we have issued the above directions. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶39

With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

(S.M.S.J.,) (K.R.S.J.,) 19.03.2024

¶41

Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No (sha)

¶42

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

4/6

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

The Divisional Engineer (Highways) (C and M), Chennai City Roads Division, Chennai-600 015.

¶47

The Asst. Divisional Engineer (Highways) (C and M), Chennai City Roads Sub-Division, Chennai - 600015.

¶48

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

¶49

5/6

¶50

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

¶51

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and K.RAJASEKAR, J.

(sha)

W.P.No.4287 of 2019

19.03.2024

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

¶56

6/6

M.L.Sampath Kumaran v. the Divisional Engineer (Highways)(C and M)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.L.Sampath Kumaran v. the Divisional Engineer (Highways)(C and M)

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

P.Jayakumari Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

K.Varadarajulu, Vs The Commissioner

The Commissioner Vs The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I

V.Sadasivam, Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Ravikumar Vs District Collector

B.Gharishma Vs the State of Tamil Nadu