Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 43299

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R. Swaminathan, J
Balraj – Appellant
Versus
Government of India – Respondent
W.P. No. 19991 of 2026 | W.M.P. Nos. 21356 & 21357 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C. Prabakaran
For the Respondents: M. Sathyan, B. Vijay, M. Murali

State authorities must ensure due process and consideration of individual objections during land acquisition proceedings, particularly following the issuance of statutory notifications under the relevant industrial land acquisition legislation.

Headnote:The present petition is filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a communication regarding land acquisition. The petitioner seeks to prevent the acquisition of his land for a project by the metro rail authority. The central issue is whether the land acquisition process follows due procedure, specifically regarding the consideration of neighbor's objections. The court noted the submission of the respondent authority that the statutory notification under S. 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, had not yet been issued, and assured that the petitioner's objections would be considered during the lawful acquisition process. The writ petition stands disposed of.

Table of Content
1. requirement to consider objections during land acquisition proceedings initiated under industrial statutes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

For Petitioner :: Mr.C. Prabakaran For Respondents :: Mr.M. Sathyan for R1 Mr.B. Vijay for R2 Mr.M. Murali, Govt. Advocate for R3 to R5 O R D E R The petitioner apprehends that his land may be acquired for Metro Rail Project without taking note of his objections.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent submitted that notification under Section 3(2) of Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 is yet to be issued and as and when the same is issued, the petitioner’s objections will be duly taken note of.

3. Recording the aforesaid submission, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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 :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 43299

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASG.R. Swaminathan, JBalraj – AppellantVersusGovernment of India – RespondentW.P. No. 19991 of 2026 | W.M.P. Nos. 21356 & 21357 of 2026

State authorities must ensure due process and consideration of individual objections during land acquisition proceedings, particularly following the issuance of statutory notifications under the relevant industrial land acquisition legislation.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R. Swaminathan, J
Balraj – Appellant
Versus
Government of India – Respondent
W.P. No. 19991 of 2026 | W.M.P. Nos. 21356 & 21357 of 2026