1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)No.10194 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 CT.RM.CT.Ramaswamy .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chief Revenue Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai- 600 035. 2.The Executive Engineer cum Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Madurai Division, Madurai-10. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Collectorate Complex, Madurai. 4.The Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D, Madurai. .. Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order made in Lr.No.M.H/12/8786/2010, dated 17.08.2011 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to pay the enhanced compensation as per fair and decreetal order made in L.A.O.P.No.37 of 1995, dated 25.09.2003 on the file of the third Additional Sub-Court, Madurai to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.Pala Ramasamy For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, Special Government Pleader O R D E R ********** This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order made in Lr.No.M.H/12/8786/2010, dated 17.08.2011 passed by the second respondent and to direct the second respondent to pay enhanced https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 compensation as per fair and decreetal order in L.A.O.P.No.37 of 1995, dated 16.06.2003 on the file of the III Additional Sub- Court, Madurai to the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.Pala Ramasamy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents. 3. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 4. The petitioner seeks payment of enhanced compensation in terms of the order in L.A.O.P.No.37 of 1995, dated 16.06.2003. The petitioner has made a representation to the second respondent on 23.02.2010 to pay enhanced compensation. A direction was issued by this Court on 27.09.2010 to consider the said representation. The petitioner has issued contempt notice on 10.08.2011. In response to the same, the impugned reply letter has been sent by the authority on 17.08.2011. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader states that subject to provisions of law, the authority will consider the claim of the petition as expeditiously as possible. 6. At the outset, The petitioner has not stated as to why he has not pursued for payment of the amount in terms of the award in L.A.O.P.No.37 of 1995 for more than seven years. The present case is revived by making a representation dated 23.02.2010 after nearly seven years from the date of passing of the award. In response to the same, the impugned letter has been sent stating that action will be taken to comply with the direction of this Court. 7. All that, this court in W.P(MD)No.9046 of 2011 by order dated 27.09.2010, called upon the authority is to consider the representation and nothing further was stated. In the impugned letter, certain reasons have been given by the authority as to why they could not deposit the amount in time. The authority has also stated that based on relevant records, steps will be taken in accordance with law for payment of compensation. Since an order has been passed by the Tribunal in L.A.O.P.No.37of of 1995 on 16.06.2003, the petitioner could have very well approach the Execution Court as per law. Based on the reply given by the respondents, no Mandamus as sought for by the petitioner can be granted. The petitioner who has slept over the issue for more than seven years, cannot as a matter of right seek payment of the enhanced compensation by an alternative route. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to quash the reply letter as it is not an order, it cannot be enforced and the Mandamus to direct the authorities to grant enhanced compensation is declined in this proceedings. 8. However, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law, the Writ petition is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Chief Revenue Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai- 600 035. 2.The Executive Engineer cum Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Madurai Division, Madurai-10. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Collectorate Complex, Madurai. 4.The Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D, Madurai +One cc to the Spl Govt. Pleader, SR.No.30925 pm rl/6c – 26.9.2011 W.P.(MD)No.10194 of 2011 08.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/