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

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 17997

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Mr.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
SREE MARUTHI AGROTECH PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TAMILNADU – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, Mr.D.R.Arun Kumar, Mr.V.Venkata Seshaiya

ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the impugned order dated 19.12.2024 issued by the 4th respondent and to quash the same and further direct the respondents 1 to 3 to award compensation payable to the petitioner in terms of G.O.(MS).No.63 dated 22.11.2017 and G.O.(Ms).No.86 dated 30.10.2019.

2. Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a lessee and was cultivating salt in the lands allotted to him by way of the lease by the appropriate Department. While so, the respondents 2 and 3 have entered into the said lands and have also disposed the petitioner of certain extent and erected towers. There are other losses for the petitioner also. When the petitioner claimed compensation, the same was not considered. Under the circumstances, the petitioner earlier approach this Court in W.P.No.25019 of 2022 and by an order dated 22.12.2023, this Court found on merits that the petitioner will be entitled to compensation and it is not enough that the concerned department issues No Objection Certificate to the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein and in that regard directed the Collector to reconsider the entire issue wi

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