M SAROJA DECEASED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE deceased first petitioner, viz., M.Saroja had filed the above writ petition praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the Land Acquisition Proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.647, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 20.4.1983 and quash the same so far as the petitioner's land in and extent of 5 1/2 cents in S.No.35.A.3 of Hosur village, Dharmapuri District is concerned.

(2.) IN the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the deceased first petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the "petitioner") would submit that she was the lawful owner of 4 1/2 cents of land located in S.No.35.A.3 having succeeded to the estate of her late husband and that she was in possession and enjoyment of the same; that her husband purchased the said vacant site on 13.12.1976 by a registered sale deed executed by one Puttaiah; that after the purchase, he constructed a dwelling house thereon in 1978 which was assessed to property tax besides the same being connected with electricity service and water supply; that subsequently, her husband also constructed three shops therein with approved plan of the local panchayat.

(3.) DURING arguments, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that it was the husband of the deceased first petitioner and the father of the other petitioners who purchased the property sought to be acquired under a registered sale deed dated 13.12.1976; that in 1980. the petitioners got the planning permission and started paying the property tax; that they have also obtained electricity and water service connections and are in possession of the property, till date; that without notice to the petitioner, the government have initiated the acquisition proceedings for the purpose of the construction of housed, by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board; that all of a sudden, they issued notice dated 1.10.1991 under Secs.84(2) and 85(1) of the Act, not only calling for the deceased first petitioner to appear before the competent authority of the Housing Board, but also threatening that if no explanation was tender or the explanation tendered was not acceptable, final orders would be passed to evict her besides herself being summarily evicted without any further notice issued and further contemplating coercive steps under Sec.85 of the said Act; that the petitioner issued the reply dated 16.10.1991 pointing our the actual facts connected to the property and the non-service of notice on her. Then, the petitioner was given to understand that on 17.6.1980 itself, the 4(1) notification had been issued for acquisition of the land in question, as per G.O.Ms.No.788, dated 17.6.1980 and thereafter, the Gazette publication had been made on 9.7.1980 and Sec.6 Declaration in G.O.Ms.No.647, dated 24.3.1983 had also been made; that all these have been made in the names of others without any notice to the petitioner.