UNION OF INDIA Vs. REGISTRAR INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It has been stated that the Government had issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in G.O. Ms. Nos. 1211 and 1212, dated 17.9.1991, proposing to acquire the petitioners' land, in Nagerkoil Village, for the purpose of forming a neighbourhood scheme, for the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The proposal had been made at the instance of the second respondent Housing Board, which had intended to construct the houses. The petitioners' land situated at Nagerkoil village, Agadeeswaram, Kanyakumari District, were also subject to the acquisition proceedings. After the issuance of Section 4(1) notification, the first respondent had published Section 6 declaration, in G.O. Ms. Nos. 785, and 787, dated 23.11.1992. Pursuant to the Section 6 declaration, an award enquiry had been conducted. Thereafter, an award had been passed, including the petitioners? land. Though the award had been passed, the petitioners had not received the compensation from the respondents, till date.

(2.) It has also been stated that some of the adjacent land owners, as well as the joint owners of the land, in R.S. No. 2/195, had filed writ petitions before this Court, challenging the land acquisition proceedings. This Court, by its order, dated 15.10.2001, had quashed the land acquisition proceedings, in W.P. Nos. 20850 and 20851 of 1994. The writ appeals filed by the state Government, against the said order, had been dismissed. The appeals filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had also been dismissed. Thereafter, the Housing Board had also granted no objection certificates to the concerned land owners.

(3.) It had also been stated that a writ petition filed by one of the land owners, in W.P. No. 21216 of 1994, had been allowed on the ground that there was no proper publication in the locality, as provided under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it has also been stated that one Kollammal had filed a writ petition, in W.P. No. 21093 of 1994. Though the writ petition had been dismissed on the ground that it had been filed after the passing of the award, the writ appeal filed against the said order, in W.A. No. 3630 of 2004, had been allowed, setting aside the land acquisition proceedings, holding that the award had been passed without complying with the statutory requirements, as contemplated under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.