R.Jayalakshmi vs The Managing Director, Chennai Metro Rail Ltd.

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35230

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
R.Jayalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
The Managing Director, Chennai Metro Rail Ltd. – Respondent
W.M.P.Nos.15973 and 15975 of 2026

Important Points

Withdrawal of acquisition notice renders writ petition infructuous, liberty for fresh notice granted.

Subject

Civil - Writ Petition

Act Referred

Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997: S.3(2)

Headnote

First Paragraph: Under Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, a notice in Form B was issued for acquiring specific land parcels for industrial purposes. Petitioner challenged the notice via writ petition seeking certiorari to quash it. Court noted the notice's withdrawal by respondent, rendering challenge infructuous. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as validity of Form B notice under Section 3(2). Ratio: Withdrawal of impugned notice satisfied petitioner's prayer, with liberty for fresh notice and challenge. Third Paragraph: Writ petition disposed as infructuous, no costs.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mrs.A.L.Gandhimathi, Senior Counsel, for Mr.A.Saravanan
For the Respondents: Mr.B.Vijay, Standing Counsel for R1, Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, Additional Government Pleader, for RR-2 and 3

Table of Content
1. challenge to land acquisition notice accepted. (Para 2)
2. notice withdrawal renders petition infructuous. (Para 3 , 4)
3. petition disposed with liberty for fresh proceedings. (Para 5)

ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the impugned notice, dated 02.01.2026 in Form-B as per the provisions of Section 3(2) of theTamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997.

2. Mr.B.Vijay, learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent. Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

3. On instructions, the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent submits that the first respondent has decided to withdraw the impugned notice, dated 02.01.2026 issued in Form-B as per the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 , but, however, proposes to issue a fresh notice for the two survey numbers in S.No.210/34A and S.No.210/35A.

4. Since the first respondent has decided to withdraw the impugned notice, dated 02.01.2026, the prayer sought for in this Writ Petition has now become infructuous.

5. After recording the undertaking given by the first respondent that the impugned notice, dated 02.01.2026 in Form-B issued as per the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 shall be withdrawn, this Writ Petition is disposed of as infructuous. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to issue a fresh notice in Form-B under Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 in respect of S.No.210/34A and S.No.210/35A. However, liberty is also granted to the petitioner to challenge the same as and when the same is issued by the respondents in the manner known to the petitioner under law. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 16.04.2026 Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : yes/no grs To