B PURUSHOTHAMAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUDDALORE & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent of counsel for both sides, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal inasmuch as the issue involved in both the cases are one and the same.

(2.) The common averments of the petitioners in both the writ petitions is as follows:-

(3.) The first respondent filed a counter affidavit contending that earlier, notice issued by the respondents was challenged by the original owner Baskaran Reddiar in W.P. No. 32001 of 2002 which was dismissed by this Court on 20.03.2007. Subsequently, the petitioners purchased the property from the original owner Baskaran Reddiar and they in turn sold the property in favour of Ms. Kavitha and Aiyathurai and others respectively. Therefore, as on date, the petitioners are not the owners of the lands in question and they cannot have any locus standi to file the present writ petitions. The objections raised by the original owner Baskaran Reddiar were overruled by the first respondent by his proceedings dated 06.07.2002 and the copy of the same was sent to the then owner namely Baskaran Reddiar and he also received it. The first form I notice was sent to the original owner Baskaran Reddiar before acquisition of the lands in the year 2001, the second notice was issued after the writ petition filed by the original owner was dismissed and the third notice was sent to the new owners namely the petitioners herein even though it was not necessary, since the respondents came to know that the original owner had sold the lands to the petitioners, such notice was sent to them. The averment that the land acquisition proceedings have been abandoned by the respondents is incorrect. The scheme was not abandoned as alleged by the petitioners and the scheme is in vogue for providing house sites to homeless adi dravidars. The administrative delayed process has been misconstrued by the petitioners as if the scheme was abandoned by the respondents. As per the Land Acquisition Act, 31 of 1988, issue of notice under Section 3 (1) only is mandatory and form III under Section 5 of the Act is not necessary at all. In any event, the respondents have complied with all the mandatory provisions of the Act. Furthermore, the awarding of compensation for the lands acquired is under due process as per Section 7 of the Act. Therefore, at this stage, the relief sought for in this writ petition need not be granted.