K.BASKAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue which arises in the present writ petition is whether order of suspension should passed against the petitioner by an order dated 28.11.2017 should be set aside when it is not extended as provided for under the service Rules.

(2.) The writ petitioner was working as Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), NH 7 and NH46, Krishnagiri, from 13.02.2013 to 23.10.2013. During this period, there were acquisition proceedings for the purpose of widening lanes of NH 46 in Burgur village of Krishnagiri Taluk. In these acquisition proceedings the Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition) Krishnagiri was the land Acquisition Officer. Land was acquired in these proceedings and it included lands which originally belonged to one Mr.Devan. After the initiation of the proceedings, Mr.Devan sold this property to Mr.Kuppusamy, who subsequently applied for compensation from the Government. Based on this application, the Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition), requested the writ petitioner to conduct an enquiry and submit a report examining the veracity of this claim.

(3.) On 17.07.2013 the Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition) issued an order for the disbursement of compensation amount in favour of Mr.G.Kuppusamy. Following this the original owner Mr.Devan submitted his representation to the District Collector, Krishnagiri, claiming compensation for this land. Mr.Devan further filed WP.No.9648 of 2014 directing the respondents to pass orders on this representation. On 03.04.2014, this Court passed orders in this writ petition directing the District Collector, Krishnagir, to consider the representation made by Mr.Devan and pass orders in accordance with law. The District Collector, Krishnagiri, in compliance with the orders of this Court conducted an enquiry and concluded that the compensation had wrongly been paid to Mr.G.Kuppusamy, due to negligence of the officers who granted the same, including the petitioner.