Disposed¶44

B.Muthamizhselvan v. the Project Director

Madras HC19 Sept 2025WP/23423/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NH 205 land acquisition compensation for superstructure/building of lessee; Arulmigu Kanniga Parameshwari Devasthanam lease; M/s Sree Veeraragava Gas Agency; 2931 sq.ft.; Thiruvallur/Ikkadu Village; representation dated 17.11.2022; No-Objection Certificate; writ of mandamus under Article 226; four-week direction to Special Tahsildar/NH Department; Madras High Court 19.09.2025; Krishnan Ramasamy J.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with the above directions (disposal of representation dated 17.11.2022 and fixation of compensation for the petitioner's building within four weeks); no costs imposed; no interest or shifting-time relief ordered. ¶44

B.Muthamizhselvan Vs the Project Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 19.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

B.Muthamizhselvan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Project Director (national Highways 205) The National Highways Authority Of India, Project Implementation Unit, Guindy, Chennai 32

¶11

The Competent Authroity / The Special District Revenue Officer National Highways Department (nh 205) Periyakuppam, Thiruvallur 602 001

¶12

The Special Tahsildar National Highways Department (nh 205), Periyakuppam, Thiruvallur 602001

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

Prayer:

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, Directing the respondents to disburse the compensation to the petitioner for the buildings measuring to an extent of 2931 square feet together with interest within a stipulated time as this Honble Court fixed and consequently directing the

¶16

1/7

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

¶19

respondents to give reasonable time to shift M/s Sree Veeraragava Gas Agency from the existing building premises measuring to an extent of 2931 square feet situated in Surve No 642 /1,2 at Ikkadu Village Thiruvallur Taluk and Distrct to some other place

¶20

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Hemalatha

¶21

For Respondent : Mr.Su.Srinivasan, St.counsel for R1 Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, AGP for R2 & R3

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to

¶24

disburse the compensation to the petitioner for the buildings measuring

¶25

to an extent of 2931 square feet together with interest.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this

¶27

case, the subject land belongs to Arulmigu Kanniga Parameshwari Devasthanam. The representatives of the said Temple had executed a lease deed in favour of the petitioner, who is running a gas agency in the subject land. Though the land belongs to Devasthanam, the building was constructed by the petitioner for running his business. Under these circumstances, the subject land was acquired by the respondents for

¶28

2/7

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

¶31

National Highway 205. Subsequently, the compensation was fixed for the subject land and the same was also received by the Representatives of Devasthanam. However, no compensation was fixed for the building constructed by the petitioner.

¶32

Further, he would submit that now the petitioner is seeking for compensation only for the constructed portion and not for the entire land. In this regard, a representation dated 17.11.2022 was filed by the petitioner and he had also obtained No-Objection Certificate from the Devasthanam. Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

¶33

In reply, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that there is no dispute on the aspect that the subject land is belonging to Devasthanam and now, the petitioner is asking compensation only for the building, which was constructed therein. Hence, he requests 4 weeks time to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 17.11.2022.

¶34

3/7

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

¶37

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶38

Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

¶39

In the case on hand, the subject land belongs to Arulmigu Kanniga Parameshwari Devasthanam. The representatives of the said Temple had executed a lease deed in favour of the petitioner, who is running a gas agency in the subject land. Though the land belongs to Devasthanam, the building was constructed by the petitioner for running his business. Under these circumstances, the subject land was acquired by the respondents for National Highway 205. Subsequently, the compensation was fixed for the subject land and the same was also received by the Representatives of Devasthanam. However, no compensation was fixed for the building constructed by the petitioner. In this regard, a representation was also filed by the petitioner on 17.11.2022.

¶40

4/7

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.No.23423 of 2025

¶43

8. Therefore this Court directs the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation and fix compensation for the building constructed by the petitioner, with a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the respondents are intend to enquire with the Representatives of Devasthanam on the aspect of No-Objection Certificate provided by them, the same can be done and thereafter, appropriate orders shall be passed.

¶44