Back
N. SATHISH KUMAR
K. Ramayammal – Appellant
Versus
Special District Revenue Officer/Land Acquisition Officer – Respondent
ORDER :
(N. Sathish Kumar, J.)
This writ petition mainly challenges the Award passed by the 1st respondent in Roc.No.189/2021/A2, dated 21.04.2022 fixing compensation for the land acquired from the petitioner for the purpose of four lanning of Gopichettipalayam – Chithode (SH-15).
2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition, in brief, are as follows: -
(i) The petitioner is the absolute owner of the agricultural lands measuring an extent of 1.50 Acres comprised in S.No.698/6 of Periyapuliyur Village. The 1st respondent issued a notice on 27.11.2024 under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 [TN Act 34 of 2022] proposing to acquire a portion of land measuring an 364 square meters for four lanning Gopichettipalayam – Chithode (SH-15) out of total extent of Acre 1.50 cents of land owned by the petitioner. The said notification was published in Dinamani Newspaper on 03.12.2014. As the land was sought to be acquired for public purpose for widening of highways, the petitioner did not choose to object the acquisition proceedings and the petitioner was interested in getting compensation for the land acquired from her. The 1st respondent assured a fair compensa
The court emphasized that failure to follow mandatory procedures in land acquisition invalidates the award, highlighting the necessity of proper notifications and consideration of market value as per....
The right to property under Article 300A must be upheld through due legal processes; unlawful dispossession by state authorities mandates compensation per statutory requirements.
The procedure under Sections 3G and 3E of the National Highways Act was duly followed in passing the awards.
The court ruled that the State Land Acquisition Officer cannot shift the date for determining compensation; only higher courts possess that authority under Articles 32/142 of the Constitution.
Compulsory acquisition of land – If any individual is to be divested or deprived of said right by State, it ought not be done without giving compensation in accordance with law for land so acquired f....
The judgment emphasizes that lapsing provision under Section 11A does not apply to acquisitions made by Nagpur Improvement Trust under NIT Act, while also highlighting entitlement to compensation for....
The court affirmed that compensation for land acquisition must be based on legally established values, ensuring equity, and mandated interest payment from the date of possession, adhering to statutor....
The government is not bound by prior negotiations unless formalized, retaining authority to determine compensation under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act.
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
