P MUNUSAMY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVALLUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner herein is one among the three legal heirs of Late Parthasarathy Naidu. Land to an extent of 0.14.5 Acres in S.No.77/14 A of Mukthanpudupet Village of Ambatur Taluk, stood in the name of deceased Parthasarathy Naidu. The said land was acquired by the Tamil Nadu Government for formation of outer Ring Road project. The Petitioner herein filed an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act on 11.03.2014 before the 1st respondent/the District Collector, Thiruvallur. After returning the representation twice, revised working sheet towards compensation was sent to the 1st respondent on 06.06.2016. Hence, the petitioner filed the W.P.No.2671 of 2017 to consider his representation, dated 17.11.2016. This Court, directed the 1st respondent/the District Collector, to consider the representation made by the petitioner under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. The 1st respondent rejected the representation on 05.11.2017 stating that the compensation awarded under the Lok Adalat settlement cannot be sought as a parity. Again the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.5099 of 2018 to quash the order of the 1st respondent dated 05.11.2017. This Court, disposed of the Writ Petition and directed the respondent to extend the benefit Lok Adalat award of enhanced compensation to the petitioner also by invoking Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act. This order was not complied by the 1st respondent/the District Collector. Hence, Contempt petition was filed against the 1st respondent. Only thereafter, the 1st respondent/District Collector, Thiruvallur, passed the order dated 25.03.2019 releasing a sum of Rs.27,51,700/-, after deducting TDS.

(3.) Pursuant to the said order, the 2nd respondent/District Revenue Officer, (LA), called the petitioner and other two legal heirs of Parthasarathy Naidu, for enquiry. They were present before the 2nd respondent. She recorded the statement on 12.06.2019. The other two legal heirs, who are the sisters of the petitioner, had given a written consent expressing ?No objection? to pay entire compensation amount to the petitioner. In spite of that, the respondents have not paid the compensation money. Hence, the present Writ Petition.