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

2023 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 71522

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.VIJAYAKUMAR
M.ABDUL KAREEM – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OF – Respondent



BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 16.06.2023 JUDGMENT PRONOUNDED ON : 23.06.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR REV.APL.WRIT (MD)No.37, 38 & 56 of 2023 in W.P(MD).Nos.21068 of 2016 and 8809 of 2021 and WMP(MD).No.5345 of 2023 REV.APL.WRIT (MD)No.37 of 2023 M.Abdul Kareem (died)

1.Thajuma Beevi

2.Asma Rani

3.Ainul ...Petitioners Vs

1.The District Collector of Ramanathapuram Collectorate Complex Ramanathapuram District

2.The District Adi Dravidar and Welfare Officer Ramanathapuram

3.The Special Tahsildar Adi Dravidar Welfare Ramanathpuram Ramanathapuram District .....Respondents REV.APL.WRIT (MD)No.38 of 2023 Tamilselvan ...Petitioner Vs

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District

2.The Thasildar Paramakudi Taluk Ramanathapuram District

3.The District Aadi Dravidar Welfare Officer Ramanathapuram

4.The Special Thasildar Aadi Dravidar Welfare Department Ramanathapuram .....Respondents REV.APL.WRIT (MD)No.56 of 2023 Seenivarusai Bin M Zakaria

42, Jalan Flora, 1/10, Tamankpulai Flora Johar Baru 81110 Malaysia represented by his power of attorney Tamilselvan ...Petitioner Vs

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District

2.The Thasildar Paramakudi Taluk Ramanathapuram District

3.The District Aadi Dravidar Welfare Officer Ramanathapuram

4.The Special Thasildar Aadi Dravidar Welfare Department Ramanathapuram .....Respondents Prayer in Rev.Apl.Writ(MD).No.37 of 2023 :- Review Petition filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 & 2 of CPC r/w. Section 114 of CPC, to review the order passed by this Court in WP(MD).No.21068 of 2016 dated 06.12.2022 and allow the writ petition.

Prayer in Rev.Apl.Writ(MD).No.38 of 2023 :- Review Petition filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 & 2 of CPC r/w. Section 114 of CPC, to review the order passed by this Court in WP(MD).No.8809 of 2021 dated 06.12.2022 and allow the writ petition.

Prayer in Rev.Apl.Writ(MD).No.56 of 2023 :- Review Petition filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 & 2 of CPC r/w. Section 114 of CPC, to review the order passed by this Court in WP(MD).No.8809 of 2021 dated 06.12.2022 and allow the writ petition.

(In all the petitions)

For Petitioners : Mr.T.S.R.Venkatramana Senior Counsel For Mr.RM.Arun Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.N.GA.Natraj Government Advocate

COMMON JUDGMENT

These review petitions have been filed seeking to review the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD).Nos.21068 of 2016 and 8809 of 2021.

2.Review Application Writ (MD).No.37 of 2023 has been filed by the writ petitioners in WP(MD).No.21068 of 2016. Review Application Writ (MD).No.38 of 2023 has been filed by the writ petitioner in WP(MD).No. 8809 of 2021. Review Application Writ (MD).No.56 of 2023 has been filed by a non-party to WP(MD).No.8809 of 2021 on the ground that he is the vendor of the writ petitioner in WP(MD).No.8809 of 2021.

Review Application Writ (MD).No.37 of 2023

3.WP(MD).No.21068 of 2016 has been filed challenging a 4(1)

notification dated 26.09.1998 and an award passed by the third respondent in the writ petition on 01.02.1999 in respect of Survey Nos.424/1C and 424/1C situated in Karikuttam Village, Sarkaraikottai Group, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court on the ground that the same writ petitioner had filed WP(MD).No. 5288 of 2008 challenging the same award. However, the said writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 19.11.2009 which had attained finality. Therefore, this Court had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the second writ petition is not maintainable.

4.The learned Senior Counsel who appeared for the review petitioners had contended that the order passed in WP(MD).No.5288 of 2008 is per incuriam and the same cannot be considered to be a binding precedent. The Writ Court in WP(MD).No.5288 of 2008 had relied upon a judgement of the Division Bench of our High Court reported in (2005) 3 CTC 1 ( Ramalingam and others vs. The State of Tamil Nadu) and the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (1996) 11 SCC 698

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 Back to top