← Library
Madras High CourtWP/13458/2013disposed of

A.N.Chenna Reddy, v. The Special Tahsildhar,

2018-07-30Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.07.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P.No.13458 of 2013 A.N.Chenna Reddy ... Petitioner Vs.

The Special Tahsildar, Adi-Dravida Welfare Scheme, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

... Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to return the land of the petitioner acquired for providing house site to AdiDravidas in Survey No.886/1 acquired from the petitioner to an extent of 2.49 acres at Begepally Village of Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.M.Ananthakumar For Respondents : Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali Government Advocate

O R D E R

The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to return the land in Survey No.886/1, measuring an extent of 2.49 acres at Begepally Village of Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

2. Heard Mr.G.M.Ananthakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali, learned Government Advocate for the respondent.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he is a very poor farmer and his land in Survey No.886/1 measuring an extent of 2.49 acres at Begepally Village of Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri Disrict was acquired by the Government. The said acquisition proceedings were challenged by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.No.2849 of 1983. It is further stated that some of the beneficiaries in the village have shifted their residence to Bangalore in search of jobs and only 3 to 4 families are residing in the village and they have already constructed their houses in different places. Since there were no beneficiaries, the petitioner gave a representation to the respondent to re-convey the land. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, if a suitable direction is issued to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate for the respondent submitted that the Secretary, Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme is the competent authority to consider the representation of the petitioner and if a fresh representation is given, he is ready to consider the same in accordance with law.

6. In the light of the limited scope of prayer sought in this writ petition and the submissions made by the learned Counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the petitioner to give a fresh representation to the Secretary, AdiDravidar Welfare Scheme, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such compliance, the competent authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks therefrom.

7. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-iv) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ms To The Special Tahsildar, Adi-Dravida Welfare Scheme, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

W.P.No.13458 of 2013 PVS(CO) ASK(27/08/2018) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/