Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
V.DHANAPALAN, G.CHOCKALINGAM, JJ
K.Moorthy – Appellant
Versus
The Director of Planning, National Highways Authority of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments from both sides regarding due process and correct handling of the writ. (Para 2 , 3 , 8 , 11) |
| 2. facts regarding land acquisition notifications and the petitioners' objections. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 3. judicial interpretation error regarding writ types and necessary legal criteria. (Para 9 , 12) |
| 4. clarification of legal rights and duties for writ issuance. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. conclusion to allow appeals and remit for reassessment of petitions. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.Dhanapalan,J)
Though the miscellaneous petitions are listed for hearing, by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Appeals themselves are taken up for disposal.
2. Heard Mr.D.Ravichander, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr.P.Wilson, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent-NHAI and Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.
3. These Writ Appeals are directed against the order of the learned single Judge in W.P.Nos.28229 and 28230 of 2013, dated 03.06.2014.
4. The writ petitioners, the appellants herein, who are the land owners, approached the Writ Court praying for
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
