Vasu v. The District Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and W.M.P.No.20213 of 2025 Mr.Vasu ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District.
2.Managing Director, SIPCOT, Chennai-600 008.
3.The District Revenue Officer (SIPCOT), Cheyyar, 4.The Special Tahsildar (land Acquisition) SIPCOT Expansion Scheme - Phase -3, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take appropriate steps for making payment as per the Award No.17/Unit-VIII Block -II dated May 2023 for land's acquired directly to the petitioner based on the petitioners representation dated 18.03.2025. 1/6
For Petitioner(s) : Ms.M.Reena For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Sathish for R1, R3 & R4 Additional Government Pleader Mr.Abishek Murthy for R2 Government Advocate
ORDER
By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2.The present writ petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to take appropriate steps for making payment as per the Award No.17/Unit-VIII Block -II dated May 2023 to the petitioner based on the petitioner's representation dated 18.03.2025. 3.After submitting for a brief while, learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the communication dated 17.10.2023, wherein it was stated that in respect of S.No.44/5H, the person claiming ownership must obtain approval from the Revenue Divisional Officer and thereafter, approach the Principal District Judge, 2/6
4.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that they may be granted liberty to obtain approval from the Revenue Divisional Officer and thereafter, approach the Principal District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, in support of its claim for computation and payment of compensation under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 and under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
5.The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner's may not be entitled to claim any benefit under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
6.In the circumstance, it is open to the petitioner's to urge before the appropriate authority regarding the entitlement under the above said enactments and the same would be decided by the appropriate authority in accordance with law, after affording the petitioner and any other interested parties a reasonable opportunity of hearing. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the applicability or 3/6
entitlement of the petitioner's right in terms of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05.06.2025 Index : Yes/ No Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order pam 4/6
To 1.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District.
2.Managing Director, SIPCOT, Chennai-600 008.
3.The District Revenue Officer (SIPCOT), Cheyyar, 4.The Special Tahsildar (land Acquisition) SIPCOT Expansion Scheme - Phase -3, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.
5/6
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
pam 05.06.2025 6/6