Madras High CourtK. Natarajan vs The District Collector on 14 October, 2008Author:G.RajasuriaBench:G.RajasuriaBEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 14/10/2008

CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA

Writ Petition (MD) No.6465 of 2008

K. Natarajan					... Petitioner

Vs

1. The District Collector,
   Thanjavur District,
   Thanjavur - 613 001.

2. The Tahsildar,
   Papanasam Taluk,
   Papanasam - 614 205.
   Thanjavur District.

3. Kumaran,
   S/o.Kadirvel,
   Vaniar Street,
   Saliamangalam - 613 504.
   Thanjavur District.			 	... Respondents

Prayer

Writ Petition filed underArticle 226of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction in the nature of a Writ directing the respondents 1 & 2 to
consider the representation dated 10.06.2006 made by the petitioner to the first
respondent and consequently to pay the solatium amount announced by the
Government to the Agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos.383-B/1A2 to an extent
of 0.75.0 cents, 383-B/1C2 to an extent of 0.68.5 cents and 383-B/2A to an
extent of 0.22.5 acres in Poondy Village, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District,
belonging to the petitioner.

!For Petitioner	...Ms.Jessi Jeeva Priya
^For Respondents...Mr.D. Sasi Kumar.
		   (Government Advocate - Writs)
		   for R1 and R2 		
- - -

:ORDERThis petition has been filed to consider the representation dated
10.06.2006 made by the petitioner to the first respondent and consequently to
pay the solatium amount announced by the Government in respect of the
Agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos.383-B/1A2 to an extent of 0.75.0 cents,
383-B/1C2 to an extent of 0.68.5 cents and 383-B/2A to an extent of 0.22.5 acres
in Poondy Village, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District, belonging to the
petitioner, by issuing a Writ of Mandamus.2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2.Though notice was served and the
name of the third respondent is printed in the cause list, none appeared on
behalf of the third respondent.3. A re'sume' of facts  absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal
of this writ petition would run thus:The grievance of the  petitioner is that he being an agriculturist
sustained damage due to deluge  in the year 2008 for which the petitioner is
entitled to claim solatium from the Government. Accordingly,  the petitioner
made a representations dated 07-05-2008 and 10-06-2008 to the Collector
concerned, but there is no positive response.  Hence, the petitioner filed this
writ petition before this Court.4.It is not known as to whether there is any Government Order in this
connection empowering the petitioner to claim compensation.5.Be that as it may, the following direction is given:The first respondent/the District Collector is hereby directed to consider
the representations  dated 07-05-2008 and 10-06-2008  made by the petitioner
within a period of one month and pass suitable orders after giving an
opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.6.The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction.  No costs.gsr/arr

TO1.The District Collector,
   Theni District,
   Theni.2. The Chief Circle Land Surveyor,
   Theni Taluk,
   Theni.3. The District Chief Land Surveyor,
   District Collectorate,
   Theni District.4. The Tahsildar,
   Theni Taluk,
   Theni District.					 	