Disposed

Manimaran v. The District Collector

Madras HC19 Jul 2024WP(MD)/13415/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought compensation for land allegedly acquired for a canal project. The government stated the land was not acquired and the petitioner produced no patta. The court directed the revenue officer to dispose of the petitioner's representation after an enquiry and personal hearing within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to dispose of representation within twelve weeks after enquiry and personal hearing.

Manimaran Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 19.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

Manimaran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Karur District, Karur. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay appropriate and reasonable compensation for the petitioner's land to be acquired in S.No.347/1 at Inungur Village, Kulithalai Taluk, Karur District under the scheme of the Kaveri - Vaigai - Gundar Link canal project in all indicators and reasonable categories along with the compensation from the date of the notification to date of realization of the amount pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 02.05.2024 within stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Illanchezian

¶14

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

¶15

1/4

¶16

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard both sides.

¶20

2.The petitioner claims that his lands have been acquired for Kaveri - Vaigai - Gundar Link canal project.

¶21

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader would state that the

¶22

petitioner's patta land has not been acquired. The petitioner is also not in a position to produce any patta before this Court.

¶23

4.Be that as it may, I direct the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation and communicate his decision to the writ petitioner herein. The second respondent will issue enquiry notice to the petitioner and grant an opportunity of personal hearing to enable the petitioner to place all the relevant records. It is for the second respondent to take a call in the matter. This entire exercise shall be completed by the second respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I make it clear that I have not gone into

¶24

the merits of the matter.

¶25

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

¶26

2/4

¶27

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

¶28

5.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no

¶29

order as to costs.

¶30

19.07.2024

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA

¶32

¶33

1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

¶34

2.The District Revenue Officer, Karur District, Karur.

¶35

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

¶36

3/4

¶37

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

¶38

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶39

MGA

¶40

W.P(MD)No.13415 of 2024

¶41

19.07.2024

¶42

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

¶43

4/4

Manimaran v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manimaran v. The 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

Mala Vs The District Registrar

D.Muthuraja Vs The Tahsildar

Gopinath.P.N.S Vs The Principal Secretary

Minor.Adlan Zishan Vs The Regional Passport Officer

S.Pandiyan Vs The District Collector

C.Palanichamy Vs The District Revenue Officer