Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
MARKANDEY KATJU & F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
Ramalingam and others
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Secretary to the Industries Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600009 and others
W.A. No. 846 to 848 of 2005
Decided On :Decided on: 25-04-2005
Land Acquisition Act - Maintainability of Writ Petition - The court held that no writ petition should be entertained after the award under the Land Acquisition Act has been passed, as repeatedly held by the Supreme Court in various cases. Therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable and should have been dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The writ appeals were filed against a common judgment. The Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act was given on 7.11.1996, and the writ petitions were filed on 28.11.1996, after the award was passed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the writ petition was not maintainable and should have been dismissed on this ground.
Issues: The main issue was the maintainability of the writ petition filed after the award under the Land Acquisition Act was passed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the repeated holdings of the Supreme Court that no writ petition should be entertained after the award under the Land Acquisition Act has been passed.
Final Decision: The writ appeals were dismissed, and the connected WAMP Nos.1595 to 1599 of 2005 were closed.
Markandey Katju, C.J.
1. These writ appeals have been filed against the impugned common judgment dated 16.12.2002.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records.
3. In these appeals, the facts are that the Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act was given on 7.11.1996 whereas the writ petitions were filed on 28.11.1996, i.e. after the award was passed. It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court that no writ petition should be entertained after the award under the Land Acquisition Act has been passed – vide Tej Kaur and others v. State of Punjab and others , 2003 (4) SCC 485; Municipal Council, Ahmed Nagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, AIR 2000 SC 671; Executive Engineer, Jal Nigam Central Stores Division, Uttar Pradesh v. suresh Nand Jayal, 1997 (9) SCC 224; State of Tamil Nadu v. L. Krishnan and others, 1996 (1) SCC 250. Following the aforesaid decision, we are of the opinion that the writ petition itself were not maintainable and they should have been dismissed on this ground itself. Hence, the writ appeals are dismissed. Connected WAMP Nos.1595 to 1599 of 2005 are closed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
