Janarthanan v. S.Amirtha Jothi Ias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.01.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Janarthanan
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.S.Amirtha Jothi, I.A.S., The District Collector, Chennai District.
(Previously Kanchipuram District) 2.Ananda Raj The Assistant Executive Engineer, Highways Department (Building and Maintenance), Tambaram Division, Velacherry, Chennai - 600 042.
3.The Tahsildar, Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District.
...Respondents
PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents herein for committing contempt for disobeying the orders of this Court made in W.P.No.24878 of 2017 dated 14.02.2018.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ramesh For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran, Spl. Govt. Pleader Amicus Curie : Mr.T.Mohan, Senior Counsel 1/5
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The Contempt Petition has been instituted to punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of the orders of this Court dated 14.02.2018 passed in W.P.No.24878 of 2017.
2. This Court passed the following orders:-
16. Considering the fact the petitioner's land in Survey No.149 Pallikaranai Village is required for acquisition by the 2nd respondent and efforts are being taken by the 2nd respondent and other respondents for acquiring land in question, this Court, at this stage, taking into account of all the facts and circumstances of the present case, in an integral fashion, comes to an inevitable and irresistible conclusion that the respondents shall not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject matter of the land measuring an extent of 30 Cents bearing in Survey No.245/1, in Village No.149, Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur, Kancheepuram Taluk till they commence and finalise the Land Acquisition Proceedings.
Further, the petitioner's possession in the subject land shall not be disturbed by one, till the land acquisition process in regard to the petitioner's land is completed in an overall fashion. Also the respondents 1 to 4 shall take into account of the 25 shops put up by the petitioner in Survey No.245/1 in No.149 to an extent of 30 cents in Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kancheepuram District at the time of arriving at a compensation for the demolition of shops.
awarding compensation in regard to the acquisition of land measuring an extent of 30 cents bearing Survey No.245/1, in No.149, Pallikaranai Village, Kanchipuram District, the 2nd respondent and other respondents are directed to take into account all the illegal demolition and super structure of the 25 shops put up by the petitioner in above said Survey Number and to determine the value with 9% interest from the date of demolition of illegal shops of the petitioner till the date of payment, in a fair, free, just, objective and in a dispassionate manner, uninfluenced and untrammelled with any of the observations made by this Court in the present Writ Petition.
17. Before parting with the case, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to raise all factual and legal pleas before the 2nd respondent/ competent Authority in regard to the illegal demolition of 25 shops in Survey No.245/1 in No.149, Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kanchipuram District and to make his claim in the manner known to Law and in accordance with Law, provided the shops are constructed in accordance with Law. .
3. Since no action was taken initiating land acquisition proceedings and to pay compensation, the Contempt Petition came to be instituted.
4. Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the quantum of compensation was arrived at Rs.6 Crores and 59 Lakhs and an order was passed to that effect. The said compensation amount 3/5
quantified by the Authorities was settled in favour of the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also acknowledged the said fact regarding receipt of compensation along with interest. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a representation has been submitted raising objections regarding the quantum of compensation arrived.
6. This appears to be a fresh cause of action and requires adjudication from the hands of the competent Authority. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy for enhanced compensation or to redress any other grievance as permissible under law. As far as the order against which the Contempt Petition is filed, liberty has already been granted to the petitioner.
7. Thus, this Contempt Petitions stands closed. (S.M.S., J.) (C.K ., J.) 29.01.2026 dsa Internet :Yes/No Index :Yes/No 4/5
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
dsa 29.01.2026 5/5