SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3314

HULUVADI G.RAMESH, PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk – Appellant
Versus
S. M. Balasubramanian – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Aayiram K. Selvakumar, Adv., T. Arul, Adv.

JUDGMENT

HULUVADI G. RAMESH, J.

1. Heard the learned Additional Government Pleader for the appellant and Mr.T.Arul, learned counsel, who takes notice for the respondent.

2. This writ appeal is directed as against the order, dated 02.08.2011 passed in W.P(MD)No.1974 of 2006.

3. With regard to assignment of land in question, the learned Single Judge passed an order in paragraph No.21 and the same reads as follows:-

"21. The contention of the petitioner that there was no notification in force under the Tamil Nadu Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Special Sites and Remains Act at the time of allotment, and in any case, the Act does not bar assignment of land and it had only regulates the assignment, also deserves to be accepted as the authorities under an Act, can regulate the use of land, but, it certainly cannot ask respondent No.2 to cancel the allotment after a lapse of ten years."

4. However, against which, this Writ Appeal is filed by the State.

5. According to the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State, the land in question comes within the close vicinity of the Tamil Nadu Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Special Sites i.e., n





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top