J MOHANLAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have come up before this Court challenging the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.708, Transport Department, dated 5.7.1988, under which a declaration under Sec.6 of the Land Acquisition Act has been issued, to acquire the piece of land for the purpose of construction of a bus terminal by the respondent Pallavan Transport Corporation.

(2.) ORIGINALLY when the writ petition was taken up for hearing and arguments were heard for some time, it was thought by this Court that it would be better that the Pallavan Transport Corporation also should have been impleaded as party respondent and as such the Pallavan Transport Corporation, Madras is impleaded as a party-respondent as per the order in W.M.P.No. 14268 of 1990 dated 6.7.1990.

(3.) THE short facts are: THE petitioners herein are the joint owners of the property situate at No.114, Karaneeswarar Koil Street, Mylapore, Madras 600 004. It seems that originally the land was owned by certain persons and the petitioners herein purchased the property on 2.12.1985 and on 17.3.1986 under two sale deeds. Pursuant to the above sale deeds, mutation in the revenue records was effected. Before the purchase of the land by the petitioners herein, Notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act under G.O.Ms.No.793, Transport Department, dated 7.1.1983 had been issued stating that the land to the extent of about 9 grounds 1337 sq.ft. is required for the construction of the Pallavan Transport Corporation Bus Terminal. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the Notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act did not mention the names of all the owners whose names are then found in the revenue register, that the Notification under Sec.4(1) mentioned only the name of Mrs.Sayed Meeran and Ram Lakshmi Raman and E.K.Murthy, that pursuant to the sale in favour of the petitioners, notices for Sec.5-A enquiry were issued to them by the second respondent, and that the petitioners had also taken part in that enquiry. During the said enquiry, the petitioners had pointed out that the land in question was a residential area and a bus terminal is a different one from a bus stop or a bus stand and it was also pointed therein that the place is not at all suitable for locating the bus terminal because a Corporation Primary School is located immediately on the Northern side of the above property and that it is surrounded by other primary middle and high/higher secondary schools in the nearby vicinity. It is also stated in the affidavit that the road is very narrow, that if a bus terminal is located there, it will endanger the public life, and traffic congestions would occur and that same will become public nuisance. It is further stated in the affidavit that the third respondent herein, after due verification, has found an alternative site near the Queen Mary's College as the most suitable and economical for the respondent Corporation. It is also stated that it was pointed out that there are bus terminals. In Foreshore Estate, Mandavalli and Vivekananda House, all within a kilometre distance and it would be a waste of public money to locate a bus terminal at the said property. It is further alleged in the affidavit that the suit property is used for residential purpose, that the petitioners had applied for construction of flats for low income and middle class families, that the Madras Metropolitan Development Authority has already sanctioned the plan for building the said flats. It is further stated in the affidavit that Sec.4(1) Notification was not published in the place in which the land is sought to be acquired and at convenient places as per the procedure prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act and the rules framed thereunder. It is further alleged in the affidavit that it was pointed out that since an alternative site had already been selected and that already five years had elapsed, declaration under Sec.6 of the Act cannot be made as it is barred by limitation. It seems that in spite of the objections raised by the petitioners, declaration under Sec.6 of the Act was issued by the first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.708, Transport Department, dated 5.7.1988.