T M LAKSHMIAH Vs. COLLECTOR OF DHARMAPURI DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the owner of the lands in S.Nos.58-1A, 58-1B, 58-2A1 in Thattanpalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Dharmapuri.

(2.) THE petitioner was not served any notice with regard to acquisition. THE petitioner came to understand that a notice was issued, purporting to be under Rule 5 of THE Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, Act 31 of 1978. THE mandatory requirement of notice before publication has not been complied with. THE petitioner is a poor agriculturist, depending upon the land for his livelihood. THEre is a failure to comply with the procedure. On account of the same, a valuable right of the petitioner has been affected. THE failure to follow the provisions is thoroughly bad in law. THErefore, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to call for the records relating to 4(1) Notification made in Na.Ka.No.55942/97 (K) issued under Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978, published in the Dharmapuri District Gazette, Extraordinary No.70, dated 11.11.1997 relating to the petitioner's land in S.Nos.58-1A, 58-1B, 58-2A1, measuring an extent of 0.98.5 hectares and situate in B Thattanpalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

(3.) INDIVIDUAL service means personal service. An individual is only one entity, distinct, being a single one and when spoken of human kind, means one-man or woman. To individualise is to single out from the species. The rule employs the word "individually". The dictionary meaning of the individually is personally; in an individual capacity, in a distinctive manner, one by one not collectively. We have to take it that the Legislature knew what it meant when it used the expression "individually".