Madras High Court
T.Senthilkumar vs The Additional Chief Secretary Cum on 17 February, 2025
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.4461 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 17.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.4461 of 2025
and
WMP Nos.4967 and 4968 of 2025
T.Senthilkumar
S/o.P.Thangavel ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum
Commissioner of Land Administration,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005.
2. The District Collector cum Land Acquisition Officer,
(Chinnasalem – Kallakurichi
New Broad Guage Railway line Project,
Kallakurichi District.
3. The District Revenue Officer,
Kallakurichi,
Kallakurichi District.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.4461 of 2025
4. The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition,
(Chinnasalem – Kallakurichi
New Broad Gauge Railway Line Project),
Kallakurichi District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records
relating to Award dated 20.06.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent in
Na.Ka.Aa.1/2674/2019 in Award No.11 so far as the deduction of 1/3rd amount
of market value towards the development charges in respect of the petitioner's
lands situate in Kallakurichi Village, Kallakurichi Taluk and District, comprised
in S Nos.157/8B to quash the same and consequently, directing the respondents
to pay the 1/3rd amount so deducted towards development charges along with
interest from 20.06.2024 till the date of payment to the petitioner as per the
provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, pursuant to the
representation dated 30.12.2024, within the time frame as may be fixed by this
Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthil
For Respondents : Mr.P.Sathish
Additional Government Pleader
*****
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.4461 of 2025
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned award
passed by the second respondent dated 20.06.2024 insofar as the deduction of
1/3 rd amount of the market value towards development charges.
2. Heard Mr.S.Senthil, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents.
3. The property belonging to the petitioner was acquired under the
Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. An award
was passed on 20.06.2024 determining the amount of compensation at
Rs.21,530/- per sq.mt. The grievance of the petitioner is that 1/3rd amount out of
the total market value was deducted towards development charges.
4. The above issue is squarely covered by the earlier order passed
by this Court in WP No.35735 etc., of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 and it pertains to
the same project. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder :-
"4. The deduction of 1/3rd towards development charges that too
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
in the case of Railway work has been the subject matter of several
decisions of this Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court in his order
dated 07.12.2023, in W.P.(MD) Nos.19772 & 14369 of 2021 was
considering the very same deduction towards development charges.
5. The learned Single Judge relied upon a judgment of the
Hon?ble Supreme Court reported in 2007 (9) SCC 447 ~ Nelson
Fernandes and Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa
and Others wherein the Hon-ble Supreme Court had observed as
follows:~
“30. We are not, however, oblivious of the fact that normally 1/3
deduction of further amount of compensation has been directed in some
cases. However, the purpose for which the land acquired must also be
taken into consideration. In the instant case, the land was acquired for the
construction of new BG line for the Konkan Railways. This Court in
Hasanali Khanbhai & Sons & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, 1995 2 SCC 422
and L.A.O. vs. Nookala Rajamallu, 2003 (10) Scale 307 had noticed that
where lands are acquired for specific purposes deduction by way of
development charges is permissible. In the instant case, acquisition is for
laying a railway line. Therefore, the question of development thereof
would not arise. Therefore,
the order passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside and in view of
the availability of basic civic amenities such as school, bank, police
station, water supply, electricity, high way, transport, post, petrol pump,
industry, telecommunication and other businesses, the claim of
compensation should reasonably be fixed @ Rs.250/ per sq. mtr. with the
deduction of 20%. The appellant shall be entitled to all other statutory
benefits such as solatium, interest etc. etc. The appellants also will be
entitled to compensation for the trees standing on the said land in a sum
of Rs. 59,192 as fixed. I.A. No. 1 of 2006 for substitution is ordered as
prayed for.“
6. This Judgment has been followed in a later judgment of the
Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of C.R.Nagaraja Shetty Vs. Special
Land Acquisition Officer and Estate Officer and another in Civil Appeal
No.1173 of 2009 dated 24.02.2009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Ultimately, the learned Single Judge had observed as follows:
“ It is clear from the above judgment that where the lands are
acquired for laying a railway line, there is no scope for deducting 1/3rd
amount towards development charges.“
8. In the light of the above, the Writ Petitions are allowed, the
order deducting 1/3rd towards development charges is set aside and the
amounts deducted towards 1/3rd development charges along with all the
other compensatory benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to the
petitioners as expeditiously as possible. However, not later than a period
of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The learned
counsel for the petitioners also informed the Court that they are moving
necessary applications for enhancing the award. No costs. Consequently,
the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed."
5. The petitioner will also be entitled for the very same relief since
such relief has been granted by this Court for others falling under the same
project and for whom, 1/3rd was deducted towards development charges.
In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned award
passed by the 2nd respondent dated 20.06.2024 is interfered insofar as the
deduction of 1/3rd amount of market value towards the development charges.
The amount that has been deducted along with all the other compensatory
benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of
four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This direction is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
issued without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to seek for enhancement
of the award. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions
are closed.
17.02.2025
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order
gm
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum
Commissioner of Land Administration,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005.
2. The District Collector cum Land Acquisition Officer,
(Chinnasalem – Kallakurichi
New Broad Guage Railway line Project,
Kallakurichi District.
3. The District Revenue Officer,
Kallakurichi,
Kallakurichi District.
4. The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition,
(Chinnasalem – Kallakurichi
New Broad gauge Railway Line Project),
Kallakurichi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
gm
17.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
