L KRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : These writ petitions challenge the respective land acquisition proceedings certain common questions are involved in them, they are taken up together and disposed One common question which was argued in most of these writ petitions is whether respective Sec.4(1) notifications in them could be quashed, on the ground that they suffered from the vice of vagueness or indefiniteness. We shall first deal with that question.

(2.) BOTH W.P.No.2758 of 1983 and W.P.No.9654 of 1986 are by the same petitioner Mrs.Marian Joseph. The first of the said two, is for a mandamus to forbearing respondents from proceeding further in pursuance of the notice of the second respondent therein under Sec.9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, (For convenience hereinafter be referred to as Act) in his No.Ka/3264/72/A dated 18.9.1983 against petitioner. The same petitioner has subsequently filed W.P.No.9654 of 1986 for a certiorari for quashing the same Land Acquisition proceedings.

(3.) THE material portion of the Sec.4(1) notification in W.P.No.6169 of 1983, G.O.R.221, Housing, dated 29.8.1975 runs as follows: