Madras High Court
WP(MD)/23643/2026 of Y.Jose Vs The State of Tamil Nadu on 17 August 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR Writ Petition(MD)No.23643 of 2026 Y.Jose .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary, Transport (I.1) Department, Secretariate, Fort St. George,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.08.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
Writ Petition(MD)No.23643 of 2026
Y.Jose
.. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary,
Transport (I.1) Department,
Secretariate, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Land Acquisition Officer / District Collector, Kanyakumari District.
4.The District Registrar,
Combined Register Office,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
5.The Deputy Chief Engineer,
Contruction (East),
O/o Chief Administrative Officer,
Southern Railway,
6.The Sub Registrar,
Palliyadi Sub Registrar Office,
Palliyadi – 629 169,
Kanyakumari District.
7.The Tahsildar,
Kalkulam Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
8.The Special Tahsildar,
Additional Wing – I,
Thuckalay.
.. Respondents
Prayer :The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent District Collector to refer the matter to the District Judge, Kanyakumari as per Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 r/w Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Act by considering the petitioner's representation dated 26.05.2026.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ragatheeshkumar for M/s Isaac Chambers For Respondents : Mrs.K.Porkodi Spl. Govt. Pleader
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent, District Collector, to refer the matter to the District Judge, Kanyakumari, under Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, read with Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, for the purpose of enhancement of compensation.
2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner's land was acquired for the purpose of doubling the railway line between Kanyakumari and Trivandrum. The acquisition was made through private negotiation, and the petitioner received the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed and executed a registered sale deed in favour of the beneficiary of the acquisition. In the sale deed, there is a clear recital that the petitioner received the sale consideration of Rs.14,45,608/- and accepted the same. The sale deed was executed on 18.12.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents seeking enhancement of the compensation amount paid to him in lieu of the property acquired. Since the same has not been considered, the petitioner has approached this Court.
3. In the present case, the acquisition was made through private negotiation, and the petitioner executed the sale deed in favour of the beneficiary after accepting the consideration mentioned therein. Therefore, it is not open to the petitioner to seek enhancement of the compensation. Hence, the prayer sought for in the writ petition is misconceived.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the sale deed was obtained by the authorities by putting the petitioner under coercion. If it is the case of the petitioner that he executed the sale deed under coercion, it is for him to challenge the said sale deed in the manner known to law before the competent civil court. The petitioner is not entitled to seek enhancement of compensation when the sale deed executed by him is very much alive. Therefore, I do not find any reason to entertain this writ petition.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 17.08.2026 NCC : Yes Index : Yes Internet:Yes skn To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary, Transport (I.1) Department, Secretariate, Fort St. George,
2. The Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3. The Land Acquisition Officer / District Collector, Kanyakumari District.
4. The District Registrar, Combined Register Office, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
5. The Deputy Chief Engineer, Contruction (East), O/o Chief Administrative Officer, Southern Railway, Chennai – 600 008.
6. The Sub Registrar, Palliyadi Sub Registrar Office, Palliyadi – 629 169, Kanyakumari District.
7. The Tahsildar, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District.
8. The Special Tahsildar, Additional Wing – I, Thuckalay.
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
skn
Writ Petition(MD)No.23643 of 2026
17.08.2026