S JAYA MOHAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful writ Petitioner in WP No. 2198 of 2008 is the Appellant before us. The Appellant had filed the writ petition praying for a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the Respondents from dispossessing him from the land and building in Survey Nos. 10/1 and 10/2 of Ramapuram Village except by due process of law.

(2.) According to the Appellant, the Government has issued notification under Section 4(1)of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the purpose of implementing Ramapuram Neighbourhood Scheme in G.O. Ms. No. 138 dated 14.05.1975 in respect of the lands to an extent of 338.28 acres. Subsequently, an award was passed in Award No. 10 of 1986 dated 23.09.1986 and a sum of Rs. 3,077/-was deposited in Sub Court, in the name of the vendor of the Appellant. Thereafter, challenging the validity of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, the Appellant's vendor filed W.P. No. 11394 of 1990 before this Court and the same was dismissed on 10.02.1999. During the pendency of that writ petition, the Appellant, his mother and his brother have purchased the property to an extent of 11 cents in Survey No. 10/1 and Anr. 11 cents in Survey No. 10/2. According to the Appellant, right from the year 1986, many writ petitions came to be filed before this Court either challenging the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act or the acquisition proceedings itself. Originally, those writ petitions were allowed by the learned single Judge of this Court in the year 1991. As against the same, the Housing Board filed writ appeals and the appeals were allowed on 16.11.1996 upholding the validity of the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act. According to the Appellant, even after the writ appeals were allowed, the Housing Board did not take any further steps to proceed with the acquisition of the lands. While so, on 01.08.2007, a general Circular was issued by the Government directing the Housing Board to drop the acquisition proceedings in respect of those lands where implementation of the scheme is not feasible or not implementable in the present condition. Pursuant to the said Circular issued by the Government, some of the lands were excluded from the purview of acquisitions, however, the Appellant's land in Survey No. 10/1 to an extent of 11 cents was taken possession by the Land Acquisition Tahsildar on 06.11.2007. The Appellant would contend that the so-called possession taken by the Land Acquisition Tahsildar is only a paper possession, but physically, he is in possession and enjoyment of the land in Survey No. 10/1. Under those circumstance, the Appellant had filed W.P. No. 2198 of 2008 before this Court for a Mandamus to forbear the Housing Board from dispossessing him without following due process of law.

(3.) The Appellant would further contend that he had filed an application invoking the Right to Information Act to the Housing Board on 18.02.2008 for which on 19.01.209, the Housing Board had sent a reply stating that for the purpose of implementation of the Neighbourhood Scheme, a total extent of 338.28 acres of land was acquired but as on 19.01.2009, possession of land to an extent of 21.26 alone was taken. It was also replied that in Block No. 1, except the land in Survey No. 10/2, all the other lands in Survey Nos. 10/3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7A and 7B have been taken possession, which according to the Appellant is incorrect since, the encumbrance certificates do not reveal the subsequent encumbrance made by the Housing Board. When major portion of the lands having not been utilised and only a small portion is sought to be utilised by taking a paper possession by the Respondents in respect of the lands of the Appellant, which is nothing but discrimination and it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.