S.Sasikanth vs the Commissioner of Land Administration

S.Sasikanth vs The Commissioner of Land Administration

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 19, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1420940

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/1420940
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Decided On: Feb 19, 2026
Case Number: WP/3934/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.Sasikanth

Respondent

The Commissioner of Land Administration

Excerpt

.....counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly placedpersons, whose lands were also covered under the same notification, had page2 of 6 approached this court earlier challenging awards rejecting their claims on the same grounds. he refers to order dated 17.10.2025 in w.p.no.21220 of 2025 in bharathy and others v. the commissioner of land administration and others. he also refers to order dated 27.10.2025 in w.p.no.25216 of 2025, m/s.deva vezman food & beverages private limited v. the special district revenue officer (l.a.), sipcot.3. learned additional advocate general appears on behalf ofrespondents 1 to 5. he submits that a writ appeal has been lodged against the orders referred to in the preceding paragraph along with an application for the condonation of delay. in all fairness, he submits that the other writ petition pertains to the same notification.4. in order dated 17.10.2025 in w.p.no.21220 of 2025, after examining the law in considerable detail, this court held as under:"25. for all the above reasons this court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 11.04.2025. since it is stated that the compensation has been deposited it is open to the petitioners to take out appropriate application for disbursement of the compensation deposited in court. if any such application is taken the compensation shall be paid page3 of 6within a period of four weeks from the date of such application. it is open to the petitioners to claim enhanced compensation if entitled in accordance with law. i must state that i have not expressed anything on the merits of the petitioners entitlement for enhancement while disposing of the present writ petition.”5. being similarly situated, the petitioner is entitled to parity of treatment.this writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned award dated 14.04.2025 on the same terms as in the order in the above writ petition. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 19-02-2026.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY & WMP Nos.4375 & 4377 of 2026 S.Sasikanth S/o.E.A.P.Sivaji, Residing at No.15, Palur Kaiappan Street, Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004. ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Commissioner Of Land Administration Chepauk, Chennai 600 005
2. Special District revenue officer SIPCOT Mannellur, Phase III, Thiruvallur District
3. District Collector Thiruvallur,Thiruvallur District
4. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Industries SIPCOT (LA) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009
5. The Chairman and Managing director SIPCOT No. 19 A Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008 ..Respondent(s) Page1 of 6
PRAYER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent pertaining to the impugned award bearing reference Na.Ka.No.87/ 2023/A1/Ta.MA.VA. A/ Thiruvallur dated 14.04.2025 (Award No.09/ 2025 V.no.1 Alagu-8, Block-2), quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently deposit the compensation amount of Rs.6,68,52,281/- (Rupees Six Crores, Sixty Eight Lakhs, Fifty Two Thousand, Two Hundred and Eighty one Only) directly into the bank accounts of the petitioner while preserving the rights of the petitioner to seek enhanced compensation in the manner known to law and pass For Petitioner(s): M/s.Vikram Veerasamy
For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, AAG Assisted by Mr.P.Sathish, AGP For R1 to R4 Assisted by Mr.Abhishek Murthy for R5

ORDER

An Award dated 14.04.2025 bearing award No.09/2025 is challenged in this writ petition and the petitioner seeks a consequential direction for the deposit of compensation into bank accounts of petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly placed

persons, whose lands were also covered under the same notification, had Page2 of 6 approached this Court earlier challenging awards rejecting their claims on the same grounds. He refers to order dated 17.10.2025 in W.P.No.21220 of 2025 in Bharathy and Others v. The Commissioner of Land Administration and Others. He also refers to order dated 27.10.2025 in W.P.No.25216 of 2025, M/s.Deva Vezman Food & Beverages Private Limited v. The Special District Revenue Officer (L.A.), SIPCOT.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General appears on behalf of

respondents 1 to 5. He submits that a writ appeal has been lodged against the orders referred to in the preceding paragraph along with an application for the condonation of delay. In all fairness, he submits that the other writ petition pertains to the same notification.

4. In order dated 17.10.2025 in W.P.No.21220 of 2025, after examining the law in considerable detail, this Court held as under:

"25. For all the above reasons this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 11.04.2025. Since it is stated that the compensation has been deposited it is open to the petitioners to take out appropriate application for disbursement of the compensation deposited in Court. If any such application is taken the compensation shall be paid Page3 of 6

within a period of four weeks from the date of such application. It is open to the petitioners to claim enhanced compensation if entitled in accordance with law. I must state that I have not expressed anything on the merits of the petitioners entitlement for enhancement while disposing of the present writ petition.”

5. Being similarly situated, the petitioner is entitled to parity of treatment.

This writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned award dated 14.04.2025 on the same terms as in the order in the above writ petition. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 19-02-2026 Neutral Citation: Yes/No KAL Page4 of 6 To 1.The Commissioner Of Land Administration Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 2.The Special District revenue officer SIPCOT Mannellur, Phase III, Thiruvallur District.

3. The District Collector Thiruvallur,Thiruvallur District. 4.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Industries SIPCOT (LA) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009 5.The Chairman and Managing director SIPCOT No. 19 A Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008 Page5 of 6

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

KAL & WMP Nos.4375 & 4377 of 2026 19-02-2026 Page6 of 6

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties S.Sasikanth vs The Commissioner of Land Administration Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy