A.Masilamani v. The District Collector
2025:MHC:2218
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN and CMP No. 18456 of 2022 A.Masilamani Appellant(s) Vs 1.The District Collector Thiruvannamalai.
2.The Special Tahsildhar, Adi-Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Chengam Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to allow the above Writ Page No.1 of 6
Appeal and set aside the order passed in W.P.No.21128 of 2022 dated 17.08.2022 and thus render justice.
For Appellant(s):
S.V.Karthikeyan For Respondent(s):
Mrs.Akila Rajendran, Govt.Advocate R1 to R3
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The writ order date 17.08.2022 passed in W.P.No.21128 of 2022 is sought to be assailed in the present writ appeal. The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court.
2. It is not in dispute that the land belonged the appellant was acquired under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978. Notification under the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 25.02.2003 and it was published in the Tiruvannamalai District Gazette. The appellant preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.8590 of 2004 and the writ petition was dismissed on 26.07.2004. The land acquisition proceedings completed in all Page No.2 of 6
respects. The appellant made several representations, but all were rejected by the competent authorities. The appellant further submitted a representation to allot alternate land which was also not considered by the respondents. Therefore, the writ petition has been instituted seeking the relief under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Act 30 of 2013. The grounds raised by the appellant are that the acquired land was not utilized for the purpose for which it was acquired. Therefore, the land acquisition proceedings are to be declared as lapsed. Such a ground has not been contemplated under Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act.
3. Even if the acquired land has not been utilized for the purpose for which it is acquired, the Government is empowered to utilize the same for any other public purposes. That being the principles settled, the very ground raised by the writ petitioner for invoking Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act is untenable.
Page No.3 of 6
4. In the present case, the appellant has not raised either of the ground which is contemplated under Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act and therefore, this Court do not find any infirmity in respect of the writ order and consequently the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. (S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(C.SARAVANAN J.) 08-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Jeni Page No.4 of 6
To 1.The District Collector Thiruvannamalai.
2.The Special Tahsildhar, Adi-Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Chengam Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.
Page No.5 of 6
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND C.SARAVANAN J.
Jeni 08-09-2025 Page No.6 of 6