V DEVARAJ Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these cases the petitioners are challenging the impugned acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands sought to be acquired for the purpose of Housing Scheme at the instance of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.

(2.) In these writ petitions, a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter called 'the Act', was issued in Government Orders dated 25.2.1994, 6.8.1994, 2.4.1994 and 28.2.1994. Since no notice was served on the petitioners, they did not have any opportunity to object the acquisition proceedings. The Government also made declaration under Section 6 of the Act and awards were also passed subsequent to the filing of the writ petitions. For the purpose of constructing houses by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the Government proposed to acquire the petitioners' lands.

(3.) Insofar as the lands of the petitioners bearing Survey Nos.382, 384/1, 383, 384/2 and 385/1A of Kalapatti village, which are subject matter in W.P.Nos.18004 to 18031 of 1996, 9747 to 9749 of 1996 are concerned, the Government issued notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act in G.O.Ms.No.191, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 25.2.1994 published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, dated 30.3.1994. The said notification with regard to the lands in S.Nos.382, 383 and 384 are concerned, they were made in the name of a dead person, namely, Sami Naidu, the original owner. Insofar as the lands bearing S.No.382 is concerned, the property was purchased by the petitioners in the year 1993 from one Selvaraj, son of Sami Naidu in whose name the notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act was issued. Subsequently after forming lay-out therein, the Director of Town and Country Planning sanctioned the lay-out on 7.10.1994. A sum of Rs.4,17,000/- was also paid to Kalapatti Town Panchayat. It is the case of the petitioners that most of them have constructed houses on the basis of the sanctioned Plans. The petitioners in W.P.Nos.18004 to 18031 of 1996 came to know about the acquisition proceedings only on service of the notification issued under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act. They had no opportunity to appear for the enquiry held under Sec.5-A of the Act. With respect to Survey Nos.383 and 384/1, the property was purchased by the petitioners in 1965. Though with respect to Survey Number 383 (W.P.No.9748/1996) declaration was made under Sec.6 of the Act in the name of the petitioner, the petitioner was not given an opportunity to participate in the enquiry held under Sec.5A of the Act.