- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 11 September 2023
- Bench
- B.Pugalendhi
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 18104/2022
Judgment
ORDER The petitioner, with a grievance that he has not been fairly compensated for the laying of a Tower in his land, has submitted a representation before the second respondent on 17.06.2022 and has filed this writ petition.
2.Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 & 3, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner was adequately compensated and if he is not satisfied with the compensation amount, he can work out his remedy before the appropriate civil forum u/s.16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act. Holding so, the representation of the petitioner dated
17.06.2022 has already been rejected.
3.Learned Standing Counsel is directed to furnish a copy of the order passed by the respondents in consideration of the petitioner's representation dated 17.06.2022 to the petitioner within a period of two weeks. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. In fine, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Index :
11.09.2023 NCC : Internet : gk To
1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.
2.The Tahsildar, Killiyoor Taluk, Killiyoor Post, Kanyakumari District.
B.PUGALENDHI, J. gk
11.09.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.09.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI K.Balakrishnan .. Petitioner v. 1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 2.The Superintending Engineer (TANTRASCO), General Construction Circle, K.Pudur, Madurai – 7. 3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, TANTRASCO, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Tahsildar, Killiyoor Taluk, Killiyoor Post, Kanyakumari District. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to give reasonable compensation for the petitioner's house in No.19/146B and land of 20 ½ cents situated in Re.S.No.358/A1A Methukummal Village, Killiyur Taluk, Kanyakumari District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.06.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arul For Respondents : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia, Special Government Pleader for R.1, R.4 Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, Standing Counsel for R.2, R.3 *****
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.