R VELAYUDHAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ appeals are preferred against the Common Order dated 28.7.1999 passed by the learned single Judge. W.A.No.180 of 2000 is directed against the Order passed in W.P.No.12283 of 1991. W.A.No.181 of 2000 is directed against the Order made in W.P.No.12286 of 1991. BOTH the appeals are heard together and common judgment is rendered.

(2.) THE property of an extent of 1.31.0 H in R.S.No.29/2 in Semmandalam village is the ancestral property of the petitioner Rajangam in W.P.No.12283 of 1991 and his brothers. THE property of an extent of one acre 13 cents in R.S.No.29/4 A is the ancestral property of the petitioner Sekar in W.P.No.12286 of 1991 and his brothers. THE first respondent sought to acquire both the lands for the purpose of Neighbourhood scheme for Tamil Nadu Housing Board and the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 made in G.O.Ms.No.379, Housing and Urban Development, dated 19.4.1990, was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, dated 9.5.1990. It was also published in Tamil Dailies 'Thina Thoothu' and 'Makkal Kural' on 20.5.1990. THE publication in the locality was made on 26.6.1990. THE second respondent issued notice dated 13.7.1990 under Rule 3 calling upon the petitioners to submit their objections and the notices were served on both the petitioners on 14.7.1990. Both the petitioners have claimed that they have submitted their objections within time. THE enquiry was held on 21.8.1990 and both the petitioners attended the enquiry and gave their objections. THE objections were communicated to the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, and his remarks were obtained. THE second respondent, namely, the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Housing Scheme, Cuddalore passed orders over-ruling the objections in his proceedings in A.245/85 dated 20.10.1990 and the said orders were served on the petitioners. THE Declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was approved by the Government in G.O.943, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 6.6.1991, and it was published in the Government Gazette, dated 17.6.1991; in Tamil dailies 'Kumari Murasu' and 'Dhinathoothu', dated 21.6.1991, and local publication was made on 21.6.1991. At that stage, the petitioners have filed the writ petitions seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the acquisition proceedings in pursuance of the said S.4(1) Notification and S.6 Declaration of the Act. THE learned single Judge held that the contention of the petitioners that their objections were not properly considered by the Authorities, cannot be accepted and the petitioners were heard in person; their statements were recorded and the enquiry conducted was proper and the acquisition proceedings are valid and legal and dismissed the writ petitions by the common order. Challenging the same, the present writ appeals have been preferred.

(3.) IT is averred by the petitioners in their affidavits that the second respondent issued notice dated 13.7.1990 under Rule 3 and they received the same on 14.7.1990 and have submitted their objections within time and the same were received by the second respondent. IT is further stated by them that they attended the enquiry on 21.8.1990 and their objections were recorded. In the common counter affidavit, the second respondent has stated that no objection was received from the petitioners during the period of 30 days from the date of publication of S.4(1) Notification, i.e., 26.6.1990, but however, both the petitioners appeared for the enquiry on 21.8.1990 and presented their petitions objecting to the acquisition. The counter further proceeds to narrate the objections made by them and it is further stated that the said objections were communicated to the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, and his remarks were obtained.