GIRIJA N. Vs. S.CHANDRASEKAR, IAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt petition is filed basically complaining that the directives contained in the judgment dated 29th December, 2020, are not complied with. The direction in the judgment reads thus:

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that no orders are passed. An affidavit is placed before this Court along with an order stating that in compliance with the directions, an order is passed by the District Collector dated 30.1.2021, whereby it is stated that petitioner is not entitled to get reference of the application submitted under section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It is also stated that petitioner is entitled to only for a rehabilitation compensation of Rs.30,000/-.

(3.) In my considered opinion, when an order is passed in compliance with the simple directions issued to consider the application, that itself would suffice the situation so far as the direction is concerned. Learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that Annexure R1(a) order passed by the District Collector dated 30.1.2021 is an illegal order since compensation on account of the property is granted in other cases even to a tenant. Anyhow, the District Collector, as the authority under the Act, 2013 in accordance with the direction, has considered application and held that petitioner is not entitled to get reference in contemplation of section 64 of the Act, 2013.