B.Lakshmi v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI B.Lakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Trichy District.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District.

3.The Joint Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), Trichy District.

4.The Commissioner, Arulmigu Samayapuram Mariyamman Temple, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy District.

5.The Tahsildar, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to acquire the petitioner's land in S.No.126/4B1A1 an extent of 280 Sq.Ft in the "Rishi Garden" layout and the land in old S.No.126/8 and new S.No.126/19 an extent 1/5

of 15713 Sq. Ft in the "Annai Nagar" layout, both property is situated in the Kannanur Village and within the boundary of Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District based on the preliminary notification in Serial No.1 to 7th pages of the Government Gazette No.345, published by the 1st respondent under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 20.01.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Mahendran For R1-R3,R5 : Mrs.S.Jeyapriya Government Advocate For R4 : Mr.V.Chandrasekarn

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 & 5 and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the properties were originally sought to be acquired for the benefit of the 4th respondent Temple. The petitioner's property comprised in Survey No.126/4B1A1 measuring 280 Sq.Ft in Rishi Garden layout and 15713 Sq.Ft comprised in Old Survey No.126/8 and New 2/5

Survey No.126/9 situated in Annai Nagar were originally included in the preliminary notification of the Government Gazette No.345 published by the 1st respondent under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Since no steps were taken to acquire the said lands of the petitioner, the petitioner sought for information under the Right to Information Act and it has been informed to the petitioner that the lands are only earmarked for the future development and the petitioner would be at liberty to deal with the said property as the petitioner may deem fit and proper.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent Temple for whom the acquisition was originally proposed and initiated would submit that the Temple does not require the subject lands of the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate also submits that as on date, there is no proposal for acquiring the petitioner's lands.

5. Recording the said submissions of the learned counsels appearing for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of making it clear that the petitioner would be at liberty to deal with the subject lands belonging to the 3/5

petitioner as there is no proposal for acquiring the same as on date.

6. In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. 18.03.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no gbg To:

1.The District Collector, Trichy District.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District.

3.The Joint Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), Trichy District.

4.The Commissioner, Arulmigu Samayapuram Mariyamman Temple, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy District.

5.The Tahsildar, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District.

4/5

P.B.BALAJI , J.

gbg 18.03.2025 5/5