Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
V. PARTHIBAN, J.
R. Suresh Kumar & Others – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Karur & Others – Respondent
W.P. (MD) Nos.17574 of 2020 and 553 & 1390 of 2021 & W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 470, 473, 1187 & 1189 of 2021 W.P. (MD) No. 17574 of 2020
Decided On : 22-03-2021
Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 – Sections 2, 3, 7 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Issuance of a Writ of Mandamus – Issuance of a Writ of Certiorari – Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from doing any construction work of drainage, laying road and other allied works in the petitioner's property situated in S.F.No.338 at Lakshmi Narayanapuram Samuthiram Village, Karur, without following due process of law based on the petitioner's representation
Finding of court: Petitioner has maliciously held up the important public project by obtaining interim orders either by suppression of fact actively or without disclosing the same out of feigned ignorance or innocence in regard to a miniscule area of property owned by him as being part of the larger extent of lands which were acquired for a public purpose. In fact, the learned Additional Advocate General while making his submission has also drawn reference to the petitioner's mother's representation itself requesting the authority for payment of compensation for acquiring of the land. – In any event, this Court is not inclined to accept that contention as a relevant factor for consideration of this Court as the request was made as early as on 20.11.2017 and addressed to the Commissioner of Karur Municipality which in the opinion of this Court cannot act as a estoppel against the present challenge. – But at the same time, the present challenge of the petitioner though discountenanced on all fronts in terms of the above narration, the challenges per se could also have been summarily dismissed on the ground of the suppression of material facts by the petitioner and having approached this Court with uncleaned and tainted hands. – In any event, these Writ Petitions are otherwise liable to be dismissed as being absolutely without any merit and substance. – In view of the fraudulent conduct of the petitioner in misleading this Court by coming up wtih false challenges repeatedly, this Court was initially inclined to dismiss all the Writ Petitions with exemplary costs.
Result: Writ Petitions Dismissed
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from doing any construction work of drainage, laying road and other allied works in the petitioner's property situated in S.F.No.338 at Lakshmi Narayanapuram Samuthiram Village, Karur, without following due process of law based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2020.
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.1674/2020 dated 31.12.2020 and quash the same.
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to the impugned notification issued by the first respondent vide G.O.(Ms) No.134, 01.12.2020 and published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on the same day i.e., on 01.12.2020 and quash the same as ultra vires.)
1. The above three Writ Petitions have been filed by the same petitioner being aggrieved by the action of the official respondents in initiating land acquisition proceedings under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 in respect of land owned by him in Survey No.338/1A at Lakshmi Narayana Samuthiram Village, Karur Taluk, Karur District to an extent of 32 Cents. The facts relating to all the writ petitions are common and the issue is also one and the same and therefore, all the Writ Petitions are taken up together for common disposal as under.
2. For the sake of understanding of the facts which necessitated the filing of the three Writ Petitions by the petitioner are stated hereunder, as per the averments contained in W.P.(MD)No.1390 of 2021, the latest Writ Petition and in the opinion of this Court, is the substantive one than the earlier two Writ Petitions, viz., W.P.(MD) Nos.17574 of 2020 and 553 of 2021. The facts are that in 2017, the petitioner claims to have learnt that the fourth respondent municipality was proposing to construct drainage and also to lay roads in the neighbourhood. For that purpose, the adjacent lands to the property of the petitioner were being cleaned with a view to acquire the same on behalf of the fourth respondent. The petitioner had been given to understand that his land in the aforementioned survey number would also be part of the acquisition proposal.
3. In anticipation that he might be dispossessed of his property without following the due process of law by the Municipality, the petitioner submitted a representation on 20.11.2017 raising objections for any unlawful invasion of his right to property and requested the Municipal Officials not to proceed with any action unjustly and illegally.
4. According to the petitioner, there was no response to his representation made in 2017 and no immediate further action was forth coming from the fourth respondent. In 2020, according to the petitioner, there was again a move towards acquisition of his property and once again he submitted another representation on 19.11.2020. As there was again no response from the authorities concerned, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(MD) No.17574 of 2020 seeking issue of Writ of Mandamus forbearing respondents 2 and 4 herein from doing any construction work of drainage, laying road or other allied works in his property in Survey number mentioned by him in the affidavit. The Writ Petition was heard on 04.12.2020 and interim order was passed in W.M.P.(MD) No.14695 of 2020 restraining the respondents from laying of road, drainage and other construction works pending adjudication of the Writ Petition.
5. While matter stood thus, after notice was received by the respondents in the above said Writ Petition, the third respondent herein issued notice vide his proceedings dated 31.12.2020 purported to be under Section 7(2) a
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
