Minnie Devadoss Vs the District Collector

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider petitioner's representation dated 15.04.2025 and consequently direct the first respondent to pay compensation for the lands acquired vide Award No.2/51 dated

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

W.P. No.25455 of 2025

¶20

19.09.1951 for the lands stipulated at Hanumanthaputheri Village, Chengalpattu District.

¶21

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.P.Wesley Isaac for M/s.E.Yuvarani For Respondent(s) : MrA.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3

¶22

ORDER

¶23

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up

¶24

for final disposal at the admission stage itself. In view of the order that this Court proposes to pass and also the limited relief that is sought to be granted, notice to the 4 th respondent is dispensed with.

¶25

2. Though in the prayer petitioner's representation date is mentioned as

¶26

15.04.2025, on perusal of record, it would show that the date of petitioner's representation is 14.04.2025.

¶27

3. The present Writ Petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.04.2025.

¶28

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

¶29

2/6

¶30

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

¶31

W.P. No.25455 of 2025

¶32

petitioner submitted a representation dated 14.04.2025 before the respondents 1 to 3 seeking to pay the compensation for the lands acquired vide Award No.2/51 dated 19.09.1951 situated at Hanumanthaputheri Village, Chengalpattu District. However, petitioner's representation was not considered by the respondents 1 to 3 till date. Aggrieved, petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶33

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to

¶34

3 would submit that this relates to acquisition sometime in the year 1951 and hence the above representation is hit by inordinate delay. He would however proceed to submit that they would consider the representation of petitioner and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law, after issuing notice to petitioner, fourth respondent and any other interested parties, including rival claimants, if any, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, which was agreed to by the learned counsel for petitioner.

¶35

In view of the limited relief that is prayed, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with following directions:

¶36

i) The respondents 1 to 3 shall consider the representation dated 14.04.2025, after issuing notice and affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to petitioner, 4^th respondent and any other interested parties including

¶37

3/6

¶38

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

¶39

W.P. No.25455 of 2025

¶40

rival claimants, if any.

¶41

ii) Though facts have been set out in affidavit, in view of the limited relief

¶42

that is sought to be granted, I do not propose to examine the same, lest it may influence the authority.

¶43

iii) The petitioner's representation dated 14.04.2025 shall be disposed of within a period of sixteen (16) weeks from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for the receipt of certified copy.

¶44

iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to respondent 1 to 3 to consider the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law. Rights and contentions of petitioner and all other interested parties are left open.

¶45