DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT Vs. K SUDHAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The competent authority under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 issued a notice under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act proposing to acquire the land in the possession of the respective respondents for extension of six lane I.T.Expressway. The respondents in the respective Writ Appeals (hereinafer referred to as the respondents), raised objections. However, the Collector without passing orders for paying compensation took steps for taking possession. The Writ Petitions filed by the respondents were allowed by the learned Single Judge and a direction was given to the appellants to determine the compensation by treating the lands in the possession of the respondents as private lands. The said order is under challenge in these intra court appeals.

(2.) We have heard the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the appellants. We have also heard the learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The documents available on record indicates that a notice under Section 15 (2) was issued calling upon the land owners or any other person having interest in such land to show cause as to why the land should not be acquired for creating six lane I.T. Expressway. The notice was published in "Dinathanthi" on 08 February 2009. The names of the respondents were shown in the said notice. The respondents submitted their objections wherein they have claimed ownership and possession of the lands in question. However, there was no follow up action taken to pay them compensation. The respondents therefore filed individual Writ Petitions for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the appellants from evicting them from the lands stated to be in their possession and enjoyment. The learned Single Judge found that the land in question was "Gramanatham". The learned single Judge on the basis of the documents produced by the respondents arrived at a finding that they have put up construction long back and they are in possession of the superstructure. The learned single Judge therefore arrived at a conclusion that the lands are private lands of the respondents and as such they are entitled to compensation. The learned Single Judge therefore directed the District Collector to determine the compensation payable to the respondents. The District Collector is aggrieved by the finding given by the learned single Judge with respect to the right claimed by the respondents.