LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR RURAL HOUSING PATTUKOTTAI Vs. ADHEENAKARTHAR THIRUVADUTHURAI ADHEENAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has preferred this appeal against the order of the District Judge of Pudukottai in L.A.O.P. No. 47 of 1974 on the file of his Court. THE said petition related to a reference made under sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, by the Land Acquisition Officer (Special Deputy Collector " Rural Housing) Pattukottai. THE facts in brief are as follows: An extent of 1.22 acres of wet land in Survey No. 252|5 in No. 157, Avudayarkoil, Aranthangi Taluk, belonging to the Deity Sri Athmanathaswamy was acquired by the Government for a public purpose to wit providing house sites to landless rural workers. THE land acquisition proceedings were initiated by means of a notification under section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act in 1973. An enquiry under section 9 of the Act was held on 7th January, 1974. at the, Special Deputy Collector's office at Pattukottai. On that day the agent of the Adheenakarthar of the Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam (hereinafter referred to as the Adheenam) who is the hereditary trustee of Sri Athmanathasamy Devasthanam of Avudayarkoil appeared before the Land Acquisition Officer and filed an objection statement Exhibit R-1 given by the Adheenam and also gave a formal statement Exhibit R-2 regarding the filing of Exhibit R-1. THE Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 9th January, 1974, fixing the compensation of Rs. 34.40 per cent, and granted total compensation of Rs. 4,837.55. On 10th January, 1974, the Adheenam sent a petition, Exhibit R-3 to the Land Acquisition Officer stating that the price of the wet land in the area of acquisition was Rs. 150 per cent, and as such the Officer should award compensation at that rate for the land sought to be acquired. In support of such a statement the Adheenam sent registration copies of two sale deeds, Exhibits P-1 and P-2. THE Land Acquisition Officer refused to consider the request for higher compensation on the ground that he had already pronounced the award on 9th January, 1974.

(2.) AS the acquired land belonged to the Deity and as the Adheenam was only a hereditary trustee and had no alienable right over the properties, the Land Acquisition Officer made a reference under sections 30 and 31 of the Act and deposited the compensation amount in Court and left it to the Court to deal with the disbursement of the amount.

(3.) THE State opposed the claim of the Adheenam for payment of higher compensation and contended that since the Adheenam had failed to make a claim for higher compensation before the award was passed, it was not entitled to ask for higher compensation and in any event the rate claimed was excessive. THE learned District Judge framed the following question: "Whether the claimant is entitled to get enhanced compensation, and if so, to what amount ""