(1.) Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
(2.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a declaration that the land acquisition proceedings initiated under G.O.Ms.No.301, H & UD Dept. dated 4.3.91 has lapsed as the award was not passed in time in respect of the lands belonging to the petitioner in S.No.36/1 in Palayamkottai in Tirunelveli District.
(3.) The main contention of the petitioner is that the award has not been passed within a period of two years as contemplated under Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act). In making the aforesaid submission, the petitioner has referred to notice dated 13.5.1996, which is to the following effect : “ An extent of 1.73.0 Hectares of land in S.No.36/1 in V.M. Chatram Village, Block IV, was acquired and award was already passed in this office award No.3/92-93 dt. 12.3.93 (Roc.No.A.34/88 dt.12.3.93). You have filed W.P.No.2977/93 in the High Court, Madras and the High Court, Madras in their order dated 10.1.96 has dismissed the W.P. filed by you. Now the W.P. has been dismissed, and stay vacated, the amount of compensation has to be finalised. You are therefore requested to produce the documentary evidence to prove the entire land in S.No.36/1 of V.M. Chatram Village is only belongs to you. You are requested to appear in this office on 20.5.96 at 11,00 A.M. before me without fail with all the documents available with you. . . .” By referring to the expression “ Now the W.P. has been dismissed, and stay vacated, the amount of compensation has to be finalised. . . .” learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the above portion indicates that by the date of such notice, the award had not been passed. To verify this aspect, the learned counsel representing the State was called upon to produce records. The records show that award had been passed on 12.3.1993. As a matter of fact, even in the notice dated 13.5.1996, there is a reference to the award dated 12.3.1993. The expression contained in the very same notice to the effect “ . . . the amount of compensation has to be finalised.” is an inartistic expression, which has given rise to the present submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. On perusal of the records, I am not able to accept this submission that the award was not passed within 2 years. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner that the land acquisition proceedings should be quashed on account of non-compliance of Section 11-A cannot be sustained.