V.VELAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition, styled as a Public Interest Litigation, is filed by a resident of Govindasamy Nagar, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai - 28 and he came forward to file this Writ Petition stating among other things that the lands in S.No.3957/7 Part and New S.No.3957/8 in Mylapore Village, Mylapore - Triplicane Taluk, Chennai, to an extent of 12 grounds and 646 sq.ft. was said to have been purchased by the father of the 6 th respondent through an auction from the Trustees of Sri Kapaleeswarar Devastanam and a Sale Deed was also executed, vide Document No.2338/70 dated Page 2 / 10 30.12.1970 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Mylapore. The 3rd respondent having found that the father of the 6th respondent possessed excess land, invoked the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Amendment Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as "Urban Land Ceiling Act" and issued notice to the father of the 6 th respondent stating that he was entitled to hold only an extent of 2500 sq.mtrs out of the land measuring 2736 sq.mtrs purchased and declared 236 sq.mtrs as excess land and a publication to that effect has also been made in the Tamil Nadu Official Gazette. The petitioner would aver that the Government has deposited the compensation amount of Rs.11,800/- in the 6th respondent's account and it was also duly received and acknowledged by him and possession of the land has also been taken by the Government and thereafter, allotted to the 5th respondent, vide G.O.Ms.No.1223, Revenue Department dated 13.07.1983.

(2.) Mr.P.N.Vignesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that despite the land having been declared as surplus and compensation has been paid and possession was also taken in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.1223, Revenue Department dated 13.07.1983, no attempts have been made by the 5th respondent to take actual possession of the land in Page 3 / 10 question and also invited the attention of this Court to the order dated 19.12.2008 passed in W.P.No.2086 of 2007 filed by the 6th respondent herein and would submit that one of the contentions put forth on behalf of the official respondents have been taken into consideration by the learned Single Judge, while allowing the Writ Petition with a positive direction. Though the Government filed a Writ Appeal in W.A.No.1369 of 2011 and the said Writ Appeal was also taken up along with batch of Writ Appeals by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court, the said aspects once again have not been gone into by the said Division Bench and vide common judgment dated 23.07.2012 made in W.A.Nos.137 and 587 of 2009 and batch, all the Writ Appeals came to be dismissed, which was reported in 2012-4-L.W. 289 (DB) [Government of Tamil Nadu and Others v. M/s.Mecca Prime Tannery and Others].

(3.) It is also pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.(Civil).CC.No.8504 of 2013 preferred against the judgment passed in some of the Writ Appeals came to be dismissed, vide order dated 08.07.2013 and would further add that fraud has been practiced upon by the 6th respondent and his father and therefore, despite the above cited judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench is subsisting, Page 4 / 10 this Court is entitled to ignore the same and direct to comply the G.O.Ms.No.1223, Revenue Department dated 13.07.1983 and take possession of the excess land, which was taken possession from the father of the 6th respondent.