PERIASAMY MINOR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in W.P.No.600 of 1983. The successor-in-interest of the petitioner in W.P.No.600 1983 is the appellant in this writ appeal. The respondents in this writ appeal are respondents in the writ petition. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the parties per their nomenclature in the writ petition.

(2.) THE petitioner challenged the land acquisition proceedings. THE only grievance expressed on behalf of the petitioner before the learned single Judge who heard and disposed of writ petition, was that compliance with Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, would be skipped over taking cover under Explanation to that rule, introduced by G.O.Ms.No,996, Revenue, dated 19.5.1976. We presently look into the scope of the said rule along with the Explanation so as to understand the grievance expressed on behalf of the petitioner. Suffice it to state at this juncture this grievance of the petitioner was not countenanced by the learned single Judge and result the writ petition was dismissed.

(3.) WHAT was contended before the learned single Judge and which contention again pressed forth before us, is that the notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act has been the Social Welfare Department and it must be taken to be the Department requiring and it is not the Revenue Department; and the respondents could not take cover under Explanation which equates only the Departments of Harijan Welfare and Backward as Revenue Department to skip over compliance with Rule 3(b). Of course, this contention has been repelled by the learned single Judge. If in fact the Department requiring the one concerned with administration of the affairs of the Harijan Welfare and Classes or in other words, factually manning or administering the affairs concerning Welfare and Backward Classes, we do not think that we should be tied down prevailing bare nomenclature of the Departments; and we should go only by the aspects of the administration. That should be the legitimate guideline to work out Rule If the Social Welfare Department only is in charge of the affairs of the Harijan Welfare Backward Classes, certainly that alone will be the Department of Harijan Welfare Backward Classes within the meaning of and for the purposes of the Explanation referred above. The specific and categoric stand taken by the respondents, and that is not disputed before us, is that the Social Welfare Department alone manned and administered the affairs of the Harijan Welfare amongst other subjects. Further, when we peruse notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act, we find that the acquisition is for Arunthathiars locale and the authorisation has been given to the Special Tahsildar (Adi Dravidar to exercise the powers under the Act.