← Library
Madras High CourtWP/31896/2023disposed of

Shanthi v. The District Collector,

2023-11-07Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.11.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Shanthi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2. The Sub Collector, (Land Acquisition), Tiruvalluvar Nagar, Mandarakuppam, Neyveli.

3. The Chairman, NLC India Ltd., Neyveli.

4. The General Manager, NLC India Ltd., Neyveli.

5. Arul Murugan ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct an enquiry on the basis of the directions issued by the District Collector, Cuddalore, ref. No.Na.Ka.L.13/87/2022 dated 25.04.2022 in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a time limit and pending such enquiry, prohibit the third and fourth respondents from disbursing the enhanced compensation connected with the NLC acquisition of lands comprised in Survey No.3/5, measuring 0.69.50 ares (about two acres) situated in Kathalai Village, Chidambaram District, to Arul Murugan, the 5th respondent herein.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Harikrishnan For R1 and R2 : Mr.V.Veluchamy Additional Government Pleader For R3 and R4 : Mr.N.Nithianandam

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to conduct an enquiry on the basis of the directions issued by the District Collector, Cuddalore, who is the first respondent herein in Na.Ka.L.13/87/2022 dated 25.04.2022.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and perused the materials available on record.

3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the first respondent has given a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation to conduct an enquiry, there was no response from the second respondent till date. Hence the writ petition.

4. Admittedly, the first respondent has given direction to the second respondent to conduct an enquiry with regard to the petitioner's representation. Since there was no response from the second respondent, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, this Court directs the second respondent to conduct an enquiry as per the direction

of the first respondent and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to the petitioner, private respondents and interested parties/rival claimants if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the abovesaid direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

07.11.2023 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No

To

1. The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2. The Sub Collector, (Land Acquisition), Tiruvalluvar Nagar, Mandarakuppam, Neyveli.

3. The Chairman, NLC India Ltd., Neyveli.

4. The General Manager, NLC India Ltd., Neyveli.

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

mfa 07.11.2023