Dismissed¶43

S.Kuzhanthaivelu v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC2 Apr 2026WP/34847/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition WP 34847/2016 (Madras HC, decided 02.04.2026, Dr. G. Jayachandran J author, Shamim Ahmed J) challenging TN Highways Act 2001 S.15(1) acquisition notice (G.O.No.224 HN2 dt.05.11.2015; Gazette No.48 dt.2.12.2015) over land S.No.36/2A, Patta No.83, Ilavankarkudi Village, Kudavasal Taluk, Tiruvarur District, on legislative-competency ground versus RFCTLARR Act 2013; dismissed - challenge already tested and upheld, petitioner dead, legal heirs uninterested, Rs.2,000/- HCLSC costs unpaid (earlier order 27.02.2026, time till 25.03.2026); no costs; WMP 30001 & 30002/2016 closed.

What did the court decide?

None - writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶43

S.Kuzhanthaivelu Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None - writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the Notification issued under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act on 02.12.2015 for the petitioner's land suffers from legislative incompetency in view of the enactment of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013. +1 more

¶25

Court's answer

Since the challenge to the acquisition under the special enactment (Tamil Nadu Highways Act), made after the advent of the 2013 Central Land Acquisition Act, had been tested by the Highways Department and upheld, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is dismissed: the petitioner had died, his legal heirs were not interested in pursuing it and the prescribed costs of Rs.2,000/- had not been paid; there shall be no order as to costs and the miscellaneous petitions are consequently closed.

¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court - Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran (author), Justice Shamim Ahmed - 02.04.2026. WP No.34847 of 2016 (with W.M.P.Nos.30001 and 30002 of 2016) by S.Kuzhanthaivelu sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 to quash, as applied to his land at S.No.36/2A, Patta No.83, Ilavankarkudi Village, Kudavasal Taluk, Tiruvarur District, the notice issued by the Highways and Minor Ports (HN2) Department under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 (G.O.No.224 dated 05.11.2015, published in Gazette No.48 dated 2.12.2015), on the plea that it suffered from legislative incompetency after the advent of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013. The Court found that such a challenge under the special enactment had been tested and upheld and that nothing survived for consideration; additionally, the petitioner was reported dead (19.12.2024 per counsel; the quoted extract of the Court's earlier order of 27.02.2026 prints 'passed away on 19.12.2004'), no legal heir wished to pursue the petition, and the Rs.2,000/- interim costs payable to the High Court Legal Services Committee were unpaid. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs and the miscellaneous petitions were closed.

¶1

WP No. 34847 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02-04-2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED

¶8

W.P.No. 34847 of 2016

¶9

and W.M.P.Nos.30001 and 30002 of 2016

S.Kuzhanthaivelu

.. Petitioner

The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Highways and Minor Ports (HN2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶14

The District Collector Tiruvarur

¶15

The District Revenue Officer Tiruvarur

¶16

..Respondent(s)

¶17

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st respondent contained in its notice under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, published in Part II Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.48, dated 2.12.2015, G.O.No.224 Highways and Minor Ports (HN2) dated 05.11.2015, insofar as it applies to the petitioner’s land at S.No.36/2A in Patta No.83, Ilavankarkudi Village, Kudavasal Taluk, Tiruvarur District and to quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents to

¶18

Page1 of 5

¶19

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

¶20

WP No. 34847 of 2016

¶21

desist from taking any further action on the petitioner’s land at S.No.36/2A, in Patta No.83, Ilavankarkudi Village, Kudavasal Taluk, Tiruvarur District under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): M/s.Amirtha Sathyajith for Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Ravichandar, Spl.G.P.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran, J)

¶25

The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Highways Department under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, on the ground that the Notification issued under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act on 02.12.2015, suffers from Legislative competency, in view of the passing of the land acquisition proceedings under the new Land Acquisition Act, i.e. the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013. Since the challenge of the acquisition is under the Special enactment after the advent of the said Central Act of Land Acquisition of 2013, which had been tested by the Highways Department and the same having been upheld, nothing survives for consideration in this Writ Petition.

¶26

That apart, it is reported by the learned counsel for the petitioner that

¶27

the petitioner had died on 19.12.2024 and none of the legal representatives are

¶28

Page2 of 5

¶29

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

¶30

WP No. 34847 of 2016

¶31

interested in pursuing this Writ Petition.

¶32

3.We find that the death of the writ petitioner had already been recorded

¶33

by this Court in the order dated 27.02.2026 itself observing as follows:

¶34

“Despite a last chance having been given to the

¶35

learned counsel fo the petitioner to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner, who is stated to have

¶36

passed away on 19.12.2004, some more time is sought.

¶37

Hence, time is extended till 25.03.2026 on terms

¶38

of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) being remitted to

¶39

the High Court Legal Services Committee prior to the next

¶40

date of hearing and proof of compliance being filed.

¶41

List on 25.03.2026.”

¶42

4.Moreover, learned counsel for the petitioner now reports that the legal heirs are not interested in pursuing the Writ Petition any further and that the costs of Rs.2,000/- had also not been paid.

¶43

5.Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶44

(G.J.,J.) (S.S.A.,J.) 02-04-2026

¶45

¶46

Page3 of 5

¶47

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

¶48

WP No. 34847 of 2016

¶49