Madras High Court
G.V.Jagatheesan vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 6 January, 2023
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.01.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
CMP No.21428 of 2022
&
Writ Appeal No.SR 123307 of 2022
G.V.Jagatheesan .. Petitioner/
Appellant
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by the Secretary to Government
Highways and Minor Ports Department
Fort St. George, Madras 9.
2. The Commissioner of Land Administration
Chepauk, Madras 5.
3. The Special District Revenue Officer
(Land Acquisition)
Chennai Kanyakumari Industrial
Corridor Project
Salem. .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, read
with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to condone the delay of 45
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
days in filing the appeal; and
(ii) Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 24.08.2022 made in W.P.No.8752 of 2021.
For the Petitioner/ : Ms.K.Abirame
Appellant For Mr.V.Raghavachari
For the Respondents : Mr.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 45 days in
filing the appeal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant extensively.
3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, notice under
Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 has not been
served on the petitioner and therefore, the entire proceedings is
vitiated. This argument cannot be accepted, as, in paragraph 8 of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
counter filed in the writ petition, the third respondent has clearly
stated that the show cause notice under Section 15(2) and the
subsequent enquiry notice under Section 19(2) were served on the
petitioner as prescribed under Section 64 of the Act. Further, if the
petitioner has not been served with notice under Section 15(2), he
ought to have refuted it by filing a rejoinder before the learned Single
Judge.
4. Secondly, the objections submitted by the petitioner dated
21.12.2020 did not state anything about non service of notice under
Section 15(2) of the Act. In paragraph 2 of the objection, it was stated
that the petitioner was not afforded with fair opportunity of hearing as
contemplated under law. But, it does not mean that the petitioner was
not served with mandatory notice adumbrated under Section 15(2),
followed by the notice under Section 19(2) of the Act.
5. Learned Single Judge, appreciating the implementation of the
huge road project from Kanyakumari to Chennai, held that the road
project has already been taken up and is being proceeded with, which,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
in the larger public interest, cannot be stalled by the Court as it would
not grant any benefit to the land owners. In other words, for the lands
acquired for the road project, the petitioner is entitled to reasonable
compensation as per law.
6. Finding no sufficient reason to condone the delay, the petition
is dismissed. Consequently, the writ appeal fails and the same is
rejected at SR stage.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.)
06.01.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by the Secretary to Government
Highways and Minor Ports Department
Fort St. George, Madras 9.
2. The Commissioner of Land Administration
Chepauk, Madras 5.
3. The Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition)
Chennai Kanyakumari Industrial
Corridor Project
Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
T.RAJA, ACJ,
and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J
(kpl)
CMP No.21428 of 2022 &
W.A.No.SR 123307 of 2022
06.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
