G.Ramalakshmi v. The Secretary To Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10-01-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE N. MALA WP(MD)No.102 of 2025 G.Ramalakshmi W/o. N.Ganesan, Door No.8A/4, Somasundhara Agraharam Street, Yaanaikkal, Madurai 625001. and 38 Others
...Petitioners
Vs The Secretary to Government Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai. and 5 Others
...Respondents
For Petitioners: M/s. B.Rukmani, Advocate For Respondent: Mr.M.Muthumanickam, Government Advocate for 1 to 4 Mrs.S.Devasena, Standing Counsel for R6
ORDER
This petition has been filed for a direction to grant an order of interim injunction against the respondents 1 to 6 from in any manner disturbing possession of the petitioners from S.No.1188, Ward No.49, Somasundhara Agraharam Street, Yaanaikkal, Madurai either by evicting or otherwise pending disposal of the writ petition.
1/5
2. It is seen that in the earlier round of litigation in W.P(MD)No.12405 of 2024 filed by the petitioners for writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to take necessary steps to award adequate compensation to the petitioners before the eviction process and allot alternate land by granting assignment patta in name of the petitioners, by considering the petitioners' representation, dated 27.11.2023, this Court vide order dated 13.06.2024, passed the following order: 3.As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, there may not be any scope for interfering in the matter. The acquisition proceedings have already concluded. Final award has also been passed. Compensation amount has also been remitted in the revenue deposit. I can grant only two reliefs in favour of the petitioners.
a) The petitioners are given breathing time of 45 days. In other words, they shall not be evicted before the expiry of 45 days from today. It is open to the authorities to evict the petitioners without notice after the breathing time is over.
b) It is seen that the petitioners are given individual representations seeking alternative accommodation. It is open to the third respondent to consider the cases of the individual applicants and pass appropriate order. I make it clear I am not issuing any positive direction to the third respondent. 2/5
4.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
3. From the above it is seen that the petitioners were given 45 days time to evict themselves from the subject property and authorities were also permitted to evict the petitioners without notice after giving the said breathing time to them. As far as the petitioners' request for alternate accommodation was concerned, the court left it open to the third respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. It is against the order passed in the petitioners' application for alternate accommodation that the present writ petition is filed.
4. The petitioners, who were parties to the above writ petition are very much aware that they were bound to vacate the premises on expiry of 45 days. The petitioners are unjustifiably trying to link their request for alternate accommodation to their eviction. In my view, there is absolutely no justification for the same. Moreover, it is seen that even after a lapse of almost 6 months from the date of the order passed by this Court, the petitioners have been squatting over the property in violation of the order of the Court. The petitioners were given reasonable time for eviction and they also chose to abide by it by not challenging the same in a manner 3/5
known to law. In my view therefore the petitioners are not entitled for injunction as prayed for. The petition is hence dismissed.
5. Considering that Pongal festival is round the corner, I am of the view that the respondents should not dispossess the petitioners during the festival season. Therefore, the respondents are directed to take possession of the subject property from petitioners immediately after Pongal (on 22.01.2025). It is needless to say that the petitioner are not entitled to any notice for eviction. This is only a reiteration of the direction passed by this Court in the earlier occasion, which has not been challenged.
sd/- 10/01/2025 / TRUE COPY / 21/01/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (CS-I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
SN To
1. The Secretary to Government Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The Commissioner of Land Administration Chennai.
4/5
3. The District Collector Madurai District, Madurai.
4. The Superintending Engineer Highways Department, Madurai.
5. Through its Dhiwan RamanathapuramSamasthanam Devasthanam, Ramanathapuram - 623501.
6. The Commissioner Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
ORDER
IN WP(MD)No.102 of 2025 Date :10/01/2025 RK (21/01/2025) 5P / 7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 5/5