Kaliappan Vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Dindigul and Others

Kaliappan vs The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Dindigul and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Nov 17, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1187049

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1187049
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: M.V. Muralidaran
Decided On: Nov 17, 2016
Case Number: W.P. (MD) No. 7689 of 2010
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kaliappan

Respondent

The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Dindigul and Others

Excerpt

.....the enforcement of the charitable object for which the said lands were endowed. 2. heard mr.g.r.swaminathan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the mr.aairam k.selvakumar learned government advocate appearing for the first respondent and mr.m.gnanagurunathan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. 3. after some elaborate arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, by the first respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within the time stipulated by this court. 4. the learned government advocate appearing for the first respondent would submit that the representation of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law. 5. in view of the above, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in this writ petition, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation sent by the petitioner, dated 27.04.2010, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondents 2 and 3, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. with the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to formally resume possession of Survey No.310/1 and 310/2 measuring extent of 6 acres and 75 cents and covered under patta No.801 in Koovanuthur Village and frame a proper scheme for the enforcement of the charitable object for which the said lands were endowed.

ORDER

1. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus,directing the first respondent to formally resume possession of Survey No.310/1 and 310/2 measuring extent of 6 acres and 75 cents and covered under patta No.801 in Koovanuthur Village and frame a proper scheme for the enforcement of the charitable object for which the said lands were endowed.

2. Heard Mr.G.R.Swaminathan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Mr.Aairam K.Selvakumar learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent and Mr.M.Gnanagurunathan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.

3. After some elaborate arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, by the first respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within the time stipulated by this Court.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent would submit that the representation of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law.

5. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in this Writ Petition, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation sent by the petitioner, dated 27.04.2010, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondents 2 and 3, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Kaliappan vs The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and ... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge M.V. Muralidaran