High Court · 2025

Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25.04.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWP No.15166 of 2025andW.M.P.Nos.17095 & 17113 of 2025M/s.Om Shakthy Agencies (Madras)Private LimitedRep. by its Authorised SignatoryMr.P.S.SivakumarPetitionerVs1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.2. The District Collector,Kancheepuram DistrictKancheepuram3. The Special District Revenue officer (Land Acquisition)Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor ProjectKancheepuram.4. The Land Acquisition Officer and District Revenue OfficerKancheepuram.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 20255. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)Oragadam Industrial Park Road Infrastructure Scheme, SriperumbudurKancheepuram District.Respondent(s)Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to an award dated 31.10.2020 passed by the 4th respondent in Award No.01/2020 in Na.Ka.No.25016/2009/F2, so far as the deduction of 30% amount of market value towards the development charges in respect of the petitioner's land situate in Sriperambudur 'C' Village, Sriperambudur Taluk and Kancheepuram District, comprised in Survey No.1585-B/3, measuring 1960 sq.mts and to quash the same with consequential direction directing the respondents to pay the 30% amount so deducted towards development charges and other benefits as contemplated in First schedule to Section 30(2) of RFCTLARR Act, along with interest from 31.10.2020 till the date of payment to the petitioner as per the provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) within the time frame.For Petitioner: Mr.S.SenthilFor Respondents: Mr.A.SelvendranSpecial Government Pleader*****2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned award passed by the fourth respondent dated 31.10.2020 insofar as the deduction of 30% amount of the market value towards development charges.2. Heard Mr.S.Senthil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents.3. The property belonging to the petitioner was acquired under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. An award was passed on 31.10.2020 determining the amount of compensation at Rs.3,290/- per sq.mt. The grievance of the petitioner is that 1/3rd amount out of the total market value was deducted towards development charges.4. The above issue is squarely covered by the earlier order passed by this Court in WP No.35735 etc., of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 and it pertains to the same project. The relevant portions are extracted 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025hereunder :-"4. The deduction of 1/3rd towards development charges that too in the case of Railway work has been the subject matter of several decisions of this Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court in his order dated 07.12.2023, in W.P.(MD) Nos.19772 & 14369 of 2021 was considering the very same deduction towards development charges.5. The learned Single Judge relied upon a judgment of the Hon?ble Supreme Court reported in 2007 (9) SCC 447 ~ Nelson Fernandes and Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa and Others wherein the Hon-ble Supreme Court had observed as follows:~“30. We are not, however, oblivious of the fact that normally 1/3 deduction of further amount of compensation has been directed in some cases. However, the purpose for which the land acquired must also be taken into consideration. In the instant case, the land was acquired for the construction of new BG line for the Konkan Railways. This Court in Hasanali Khanbhai & Sons & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, 1995 2 SCC 422 and L.A.O. vs. Nookala Rajamallu, 2003 (10) Scale 307 had noticed that where lands are acquired for specific purposes deduction by way of development charges is permissible. In the instant case, acquisition is for laying a railway line. Therefore, the question of development thereof would not arise. Therefore, the order passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside and in view of the availability of basic civic amenities such as school, bank, police station, water supply, electricity, high way, transport, post, petrol pump, industry, telecommunication and other businesses, the claim of compensation should reasonably be fixed @ Rs.250/ per sq. mtr. with the deduction of 20%. The appellant shall be entitled to all other statutory benefits such as solatium, interest etc. etc. The appellants also will be entitled to compensation for the trees standing on the said land in a sum of Rs. 59,192 as fixed. I.A. No. 1 of 2006 for substitution is ordered as prayed for.“6. This Judgment has been followed in a later judgment of the Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of C.R.Nagaraja Shetty Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025Estate Officer and another in Civil Appeal No.1173 of 2009 dated 24.02.2009. 7. Ultimately, the learned Single Judge had observed as follows:“ It is clear from the above judgment that where the lands are acquired for laying a railway line, there is no scope for deducting 1/3rd amount towards development charges.“8. In the light of the above, the Writ Petitions are allowed, the order deducting 1/3rd towards development charges is set aside and the amounts deducted towards 1/3rd development charges along with all the other compensatory benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. However, not later than a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The learned counsel for the petitioners also informed the Court that they are moving necessary applications for enhancing the award. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed."5. The petitioner will also be entitled for the very same relief since such relief has been granted by this Court for others falling under the same project and for whom, 1/3rd was deducted towards development charges. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned award passed by the 4th respondent dated 31.10.2020 is interfered insofar as the deduction of 1/3rd amount of market value towards the development charges. The amount that has been deducted along with all the other compensatory benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025the petitioner within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This direction is issued without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to seek for enhancement of the award. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.25.04.2025Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: Yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdermkTo1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.2. The District Collector,Kancheepuram DistrictKancheepuram3. The Special District Revenue officer (Land Acquisition)Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor ProjectKancheepuram.4. The Land Acquisition Officer and District Revenue OfficerKancheepuram.5. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)Oragadam Industrial Park Road Infrastructure Scheme, SriperumbudurKancheepuram District.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025N.ANAND VENKATESH.J.,mkWrit Petition No.15166 of 202525.04.20257/7

Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25.04.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWP No.15166 of 2025andW.M.P.Nos.17095 & 17113 of 2025M/s.Om Shakthy Agencies (Madras)Private LimitedRep. by its Authorised SignatoryMr.P.S.SivakumarPetitionerVs1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.2. The District Collector,Kancheepuram DistrictKancheepuram3. The Special District Revenue officer (Land Acquisition)Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor ProjectKancheepuram.4. The Land Acquisition Officer and District Revenue OfficerKancheepuram.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 20255. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)Oragadam Industrial Park Road Infrastructure Scheme, SriperumbudurKancheepuram District.Respondent(s)Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to an award dated 31.10.2020 passed by the 4th respondent in Award No.01/2020 in Na.Ka.No.25016/2009/F2, so far as the deduction of 30% amount of market value towards the development charges in respect of the petitioner's land situate in Sriperambudur 'C' Village, Sriperambudur Taluk and Kancheepuram District, comprised in Survey No.1585-B/3, measuring 1960 sq.mts and to quash the same with consequential direction directing the respondents to pay the 30% amount so deducted towards development charges and other benefits as contemplated in First schedule to Section 30(2) of RFCTLARR Act, along with interest from 31.10.2020 till the date of payment to the petitioner as per the provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) within the time frame.For Petitioner: Mr.S.SenthilFor Respondents: Mr.A.SelvendranSpecial Government Pleader*****2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned award passed by the fourth respondent dated 31.10.2020 insofar as the deduction of 30% amount of the market value towards development charges.2. Heard Mr.S.Senthil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents.3. The property belonging to the petitioner was acquired under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. An award was passed on 31.10.2020 determining the amount of compensation at Rs.3,290/- per sq.mt. The grievance of the petitioner is that 1/3rd amount out of the total market value was deducted towards development charges.4. The above issue is squarely covered by the earlier order passed by this Court in WP No.35735 etc., of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 and it pertains to the same project. The relevant portions are extracted 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025hereunder :-"4. The deduction of 1/3rd towards development charges that too in the case of Railway work has been the subject matter of several decisions of this Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court in his order dated 07.12.2023, in W.P.(MD) Nos.19772 & 14369 of 2021 was considering the very same deduction towards development charges.5. The learned Single Judge relied upon a judgment of the Hon?ble Supreme Court reported in 2007 (9) SCC 447 ~ Nelson Fernandes and Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa and Others wherein the Hon-ble Supreme Court had observed as follows:~“30. We are not, however, oblivious of the fact that normally 1/3 deduction of further amount of compensation has been directed in some cases. However, the purpose for which the land acquired must also be taken into consideration. In the instant case, the land was acquired for the construction of new BG line for the Konkan Railways. This Court in Hasanali Khanbhai & Sons & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, 1995 2 SCC 422 and L.A.O. vs. Nookala Rajamallu, 2003 (10) Scale 307 had noticed that where lands are acquired for specific purposes deduction by way of development charges is permissible. In the instant case, acquisition is for laying a railway line. Therefore, the question of development thereof would not arise. Therefore, the order passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside and in view of the availability of basic civic amenities such as school, bank, police station, water supply, electricity, high way, transport, post, petrol pump, industry, telecommunication and other businesses, the claim of compensation should reasonably be fixed @ Rs.250/ per sq. mtr. with the deduction of 20%. The appellant shall be entitled to all other statutory benefits such as solatium, interest etc. etc. The appellants also will be entitled to compensation for the trees standing on the said land in a sum of Rs. 59,192 as fixed. I.A. No. 1 of 2006 for substitution is ordered as prayed for.“6. This Judgment has been followed in a later judgment of the Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of C.R.Nagaraja Shetty Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025Estate Officer and another in Civil Appeal No.1173 of 2009 dated 24.02.2009. 7. Ultimately, the learned Single Judge had observed as follows:“ It is clear from the above judgment that where the lands are acquired for laying a railway line, there is no scope for deducting 1/3rd amount towards development charges.“8. In the light of the above, the Writ Petitions are allowed, the order deducting 1/3rd towards development charges is set aside and the amounts deducted towards 1/3rd development charges along with all the other compensatory benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. However, not later than a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The learned counsel for the petitioners also informed the Court that they are moving necessary applications for enhancing the award. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed."5. The petitioner will also be entitled for the very same relief since such relief has been granted by this Court for others falling under the same project and for whom, 1/3rd was deducted towards development charges. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned award passed by the 4th respondent dated 31.10.2020 is interfered insofar as the deduction of 1/3rd amount of market value towards the development charges. The amount that has been deducted along with all the other compensatory benefits arrived at in the award shall be paid to 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025the petitioner within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This direction is issued without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to seek for enhancement of the award. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.25.04.2025Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: Yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdermkTo1. The Additional Chief Secretary cum Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.2. The District Collector,Kancheepuram DistrictKancheepuram3. The Special District Revenue officer (Land Acquisition)Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor ProjectKancheepuram.4. The Land Acquisition Officer and District Revenue OfficerKancheepuram.5. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)Oragadam Industrial Park Road Infrastructure Scheme, SriperumbudurKancheepuram District.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.15166 of 2025N.ANAND VENKATESH.J.,mkWrit Petition No.15166 of 202525.04.20257/7