Quashed

Jerin Jenila v. The District Collector

Madras HC2 Sept 2024WP(MD)/20802/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court allowed a Writ Petition challenging a notice dated 13.08.2024 issued under Section 28 of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 for removal of an immovable encroachment. The Court held that the statutory procedure was not followed and quashed the notice.

What did the court decide?

The notice dated 13.08.2024 is set aside with liberty to the respondents to take action strictly in accordance with Section 28 of the Act.

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

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.09.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.17621 and 17623 of 2024

Jerin Jenila

... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District.

¶12

2.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu State High ways Department, Construction and Maintenance, Thakkalai,

¶13

Kanyakumari District.

¶14

3.The Tahsildar, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Ka.No.140/2024/A2, dated 13.08.2024, passed by the second respondent and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Jeyaram Sidharth For Respondents : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶18

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

[Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.]

¶21

Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶22

2.Challenge is to the notice dated 13.08.2024, issued under Section 28 of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001.

¶23

3.The Encroachment in question is an immovable encroachment. Section 28(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, requires the authority to issue notice granting seven days period to show cause against the removal and the proviso requires the authority to consider any representation received within the time limit. Admittedly, the said procedure has not been followed.

¶24

4.Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the notice dated 13.08.2024,

¶25

is set aside with liberty to the respondents to take action strictly in

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 2 of 4_

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024

¶28

accordance with Section 28 of the Act. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶29

[R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.] 02.09.2024

¶30

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes Mrn

¶31

¶32

1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District.

¶33

2.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu State High ways Department, Construction and Maintenance, Thakkalai,

¶34

Kanyakumari District.

¶35

3.The Tahsildar, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 3 of 4_

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024

¶38

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶39

Mrn

¶40

W.P.(MD) No.20802 of 2024

¶41

02.09.2024

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 4 of 4_

Jerin Jenila v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jerin Jenila 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

S.Ravisekaran Vs Dr.v.P.Jeyaseelan IAS

P.Kumar Vs v.Rajaraman IAS

The Director Vs Theertha Jayakrishnan

R.Boominathan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Mary Stellabai Vs The District Collector

K.Radhakrishnan Vs The Director General of police