G MUNIASAMY Vs. COLLECTOR RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter arises under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Adi Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to "as the Act").

(2.) The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of writ of Certiorari to quash the notification dated 28.04.2001 issued by the first respondent under Section 4(1) of the Act and published in the Ramanathapuram District Gazette, dated 19.05.2001, in respect of the lands in survey No.61/2 & 61/4, Kusavankudi village, Ramanathapuram Taluk measuring an extent of 2.09.5 hectares.

(3.) The facts which are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are that the subject lands together with a larger extent was originally owned by one Mr.Kasim and during the year 1966, the said Mr.Kasim settled the properties in favour of his son Mr.K.Syed Sahul Hameed by executing inam settlement deed dated 14.06.1966, which was registered as document No:1543, on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Ramanathapuram; that from the date of the settlement, the said Mr.K.Syed Sahul Hameed was in enjoyment of the property and paying the kist. The petitioner is stated to have purchased the property comprised in Survey No. 61/2 & 61/4 measuring an extent 2.09.5 hectares from the said Mr.K.Syed Sahul Hameed by sale deed dated 07.02.2002. That the said lands were subjected to acquisition proceedings under the Act for the provision of the house sites to the Adi-Dravidar of the said village and a notice under Section 4(2) of the Act was issued to one Mr.K.Ahamed. According to the petitioner, Mr.K.Ahamed is not the owner of the property. Further, it is submitted that the impugned notification issued under Section 4(1) was also published in the name of Mr.K.Ahamed. That the petitioner came to know only after the compensation amount was determined and the said K.Ahamed also gave a letter of objection under Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Adi-Dravidar Welfare Schemes Rule 1979. It is stated that Mr.K.Ahamed is not in India and he is not the owner of the land and he has no interest in the land and therefore, the authorities committed procedural irregularity by serving notice on Mr.K.Ahamed; that no notice was served on the petitioner's vendor Mr.K.Syed Sahul Hameed and that the notice under Section 4(2) was also served by affixure in the residence of Mr.K.Ahamed at No.4/124, Hussainya street, Vani village. On the above grounds, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition stating that as he has purchased the property in 2002, he is also a person interested and therefore, he is entitled to question the acquisition proceedings.