W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09.01.2026 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 & C.M.P.Nos.32488 & 32490 of 2025 S.Bharanidharan .. Appellant in WA No.4007/25 B.Devaraj .. Appellant in WA No.4008/25 Vs. 1. Tambaram Corporation Rep. By its Commissioner No.28, Muthu Ranga Mudali Street Tambaram West, Chennai 600 045. 2. The Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquistion) Chennai Kanniya Kumari Industrial Road Scheme Collectorate Building Kancheepuram. 3. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Respondents in Tambaram, Chennai 600 045. .. both W.As. __________ p. 2 W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 Prayer : Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 02.12.2025 made in W.P.No.45045 of 2025 and against the order dated 02.12.2025 made in W.P.No.45043 of 2025 respectively. For Appellants : Mr.K.K.Senthilvelan Senior Counsel For Mr.U.Rajkumar For Mr.J.Thomas Saran Singh (WA No.4007 of 2025) Mr.NGR Prasad (Through Video Conferencing) For Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For Mr.J.Thomas Saran Singh (WA No.4008 of 2025) For Respondents : Mr.P.Srinivas Standing Counsel for Respondent-1 Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader for Respondents 2 & 3 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) From a perusal of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, it is reflected that appellants herein, at the time of hearing, only sought a direction for allotment of an alternative plot without __________ p. 3 W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 challenging the legality and validity of the acquisition proceedings. 2. Learned counsel for respective appellants would submit that many grounds were raised by them in the writ petitions, including challenge to the legality and validity of the acquisition proceedings. What has been recorded in the order is not correct, as, many other grounds were also pressed into service, but not referred to. 3. If that be the reason, learned counsel for appellants are given liberty to file review petitions. 4. With liberty, appeals are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim applications are also dismissed. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 09.01.2026 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No kpl __________ p. 4 W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 To 1. The Commissioner Tambaram Corporation No.28, Muthu Ranga Mudali Street Tambaram West Chennai 600 045. 2. The Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquistion) Chennai Kanniya Kumari Industrial Road Scheme Collectorate Building Kancheepuram. 3. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Tambaram Chennai 600 045. __________ p. 5 W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. (kpl) W.A.Nos.4007 & 4008 of 2025 09.01.2026 __________