Madras High Court
A.Sundaraj vs The District Collector on 8 January, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar, R.Vijayakumar
W.A.(MD) No.15 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 08.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A.(MD) No.15 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.78 of 2024
A.Sundaraj ... Appellant/Petitioner
-vs-
1.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari District,
Nagercoil.
2.The Competent Authority & District Revenue Officer,
Land Acquisition National Highways,
Tirunelveli @ Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Project Director cum DGM (Tech),
No.314E, K.P.Road,
Near Ayappan Kovil,
Parvathipuram, Nagercoil – 629 003,
Kanyakumari District.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Padmanapuram, Kanyakumari District.
____________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.15 of 2024
5.The Special Tahsildar (LANH Unit III),
Villvancode, Thiruthuvapuram,
Kanyakumari District.
6.The Tahsildar,
Kalkulam Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
7.The Land Surveyor,
Thiruvithancode,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents/Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order,
dated 07.12.2023, passed in W.P.(MD) No.20139 of 2021, on the file of this
Court.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Justin
For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjadkhan
Government Advocate for R1, R2, R4 to R7
Mr.Su.Srinivasan for R3
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.]
Challenge in this writ appeal is to the order dated 07.12.2023, passed
in W.P.(MD) No.20139 of 2021, by the Writ Court.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. Though the appellant has filed this Writ Appeal, raising several
grounds, the learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the
respondent highways had acquired only an extent of 59 cents in S.No.830/5,
Valvachangostam Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District, from the
appellant and the remaining 10 cents of land, which belongs to the appellant has
been encroached by the respondent Highways and for that they have not paid any
compensation amount.
3. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1, 2,
4 to 7 would drew our attention by stating that the appellant has also filed a suit
in O.S.No.336 of 2018 on the file of Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram for
declaration and mandatory injunction as against the possession of the property to
an extent of 10 cents and hence, the Writ Court has directed the appellant to
workout his remedy before competent forum.
4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials placed before this Court.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. It is an admitted fact that the appellant has already filed the suit for
declaration and mandatory injunction in respect of the above said 10 cents of land
and the same is pending. While so, the appellant has filed the Writ Petition
alleging that the respondent Highways have encroached the said 10 cents of land
without paying the compensation. There is a dispute between the appellant and
private parties in respect of the said 10 cents. For resolving the disputed questions
of facts, the appellant cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, for which the appellant has to seek remedy in the
pending civil suit. Therefore, the Writ Court has rightly dismissed the Writ
Petition and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the same.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[D.K.K., J.] [R.V., J.]
08.01.2024
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
SJ
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
and
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
SJ
08.01.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
