Prayer: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay compensation to the petitioner for the construction of fisherman housing on 0.25.5 hectares in the petitioners land in survey no.262/3A, Mookaiyur Village, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District by considering the petitioner representation dated 16.04.2026 and for other reliefs and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

ORDER

1. The writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner for the construction of the fisherman housing on the land belonging to the petitioner in S.No. 262/3A, Mookaiyur Village, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram Distrct by considering the petitioner's representation dated 16.04.2026.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the land, apart from being enjoyed in common also belonged to the petitioner's father, whose name was duly reflected in the revenue records. The petitioner's request for payment of compensation has been rejected solely on the ground that the petitioner's father and others had allegedly, on an oral understanding, permitted the Government to use the land.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there cannot be any valid oral donation of land. Since the petitioner's land was utilized for a public purpose, namely, for the construction of houses for fishermen affected by the Tsunami, compensation ought to have been paid. The petitioner is only seeking compensation and is not seeking restoration or return of the land.

4. Per contra, learned Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that the petitioner's request had already been considered in detail and was rejected by an order dated 04.01.2011. The petitioner had also preferred a revision before the Government. However, thereafter, petitioner did not pursue the matter and after a lapse of nearly 15 years, petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

5. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6. In the present case, claiming that the land in question belonged to the petitioner's father, the petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(MD) No. 10912 of 2008. By an order dated 28.11.2008, this Court directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's request and pass orders in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, the District Collector passed an order dated 04.01.2011 rejecting the petitioner's claim. If the petitioner was aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner ought to have challenged the same at the relevant point of time.

7. The petitioner has approached this Court after a lapse of nearly 15 years. Further, the cause of action itself relates to the construction of houses for Tsunami victims on the land in question, and the houses were constructed during the period from 2010 to 2012.

8. Therefore, in view of the lapse of 15 years from the date of the order passed by the District Collector, which has remained unchallenged all along, the present request cannot be entertained at this belated stage. The claim is liable to be rejected on the ground of delay and laches. No further claim in this regard can now be entertained.

9. In view of the delay and latches, the writ petition is not entertained. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.