EXSURGE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN Vs. PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI); CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, TAMIL NADU SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; COLLECTOR, VELLORE COLLECTORATE, SATHUVACHARI, VELLORE DISTRICT; COMPETENT AUTHORITY CUM SPECIAL DISTRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first and fourth respondents to implement the communication, dated 10.03.2015, by which the District Revenue Officer, Vellore, directed the first respondent, the Project Director, NHAI, to take action to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.4,06,479/- immediately for the land and industrial unit in new Survey No.13/7, in Plot No.D, at SIDCO Industrial Estate, Vannivedu Village, Walaja Taluk, Vellore District which had been acquired by the National Highways.

(2.) Heard Mr. David Tyagaraj learned counsel assisted by Mr.Vinod Paul Tyagaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Abdul Saleem, learned counsel for the second respondent, and Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader for the third and fifth respondents.

(3.) The petitioner is a Proprietorship concern initially called as M/s.Anbu Sons and at present called as M/s.Exsurge. They applied for allotment of a developed plot in an Industrial Estate promoted by SIDCO at Vannivedu Village, Vellore District, by application, dated 30.05.1997. The application was favourably considered and by communication, dated 07.07.1997, the petitioner was informed that developed plot bearing No.D, measuring an extent of about 1.19 acres is offered to the petitioner on outright purchase basis, subject to the conditions contained in the said communication. The tentative cost of the developed plot was fixed at Rs.1,73,500/-. The plot was to be utilised for the manufacturer or fabrication columns, casing cells, hoppers for electronic precipitation etc. The provisional allotment order duly signed, was returned by the petitioner to SIDCO. While doing so, it was pointed out that the measurement of the plot on the east-west boundaries was not given in the blue print and therefore, SIDCO was requested to furnish the said information to enable the petitioner to submit the building plan for approval. The SIDCO by communication dated 15.11.1997, addressed to the petitioner while accepting the payment of Rs.1,73,500/-, paid on 06.10.1997, indicated that there was a balance amount of Rs.5023/- payable towards plot cost and interest for belated payment and they were requested to remit the same. Along with the communication, the lay out of the industrial estate mentioning the measurement of all four sides of each plot was furnished to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to furnish six copies of the building plan, proof for financial tie-up to implement the project and provisional SSI certificate. The petitioner by their letter dated 25.11.1997, pointed out that the demand for Rs.5,000/- over and above the payment made by the petitioner is not justified for the reasons stated therein. While so, it appears that there was a difference in the actual extent of the land allotted to the petitioner, as it was short of about 18 cents lesser than the extent mentioned in the order of allotment. The extent allotted to the petitioner was 1.19 acres, but the actual extent available on ground was 1.01 acres, i.e., 18 cents less than what was allotted. While accepting the shortage of area, the petitioner was informed by SIDCO that refund of the plot cost towards the shortage area, will be considered after receipt of charge papers on handing over the plot allotted to the petitioner. The copy of the revised lay out showing the exact extent of the plot was enclosed along with the communication, dated 12.01.1998.