REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE Vs. ATHAPPA GOUNDER DIED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three appeals and the Cross Objections are filed against the Land Acquisition Awards passed in L.A.O.P. Nos.13, 14 and 16 of 1984 on the file of the Sub-Court, Erode, Periyar District. A total extent of 156.78 acres of land in Erode and Soorampatty Villages of Erode Taluk were acquired for the construction of houses under the Low Income Group and Middle Income Group Schemes and also for the construction of the Office of the District Collector as well as the District Court Building.

(2.) In the three appeals, we are concerned with three sets of L.A.O.Ps. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was approved by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.156, Housing dated 27.2.1973 and published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 14.3.1973. The following lands are covered under these L.A.O.Ps. as per the Reference by the <FRM>B.25.541.1205.htm</FRM>

(3.) The Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode passed an Award in reference to the above lands in Award No.1 of 1980 dated 29.2.1980 thereby determining the market value of these lands at Rs.2/- per sq.ft. and after deducting 20% towards the developmental charges, fixed the compensation at Rs.1/35 per sq.ft. The Land Acquisition Officer in all these awards has observed that the real owners have stated that the interested persons notified in the fields in question are the same persons notified as interested persons in R.S. Nos.409/1A and 409/2. The interested persons who appeared for the award enquiry could not say as to whom the fields belong. They have simply objected to the acquisition of the fields. Inasmuch as there is no documentary evidence to show the exact persons who own the above fields, the compensation could not be apportioned and paid to the proper interested persons. Therefore, in the absence of the real contesting parties, it was not safe to apportion the compensation between the persons. Hence, the compensation was ordered to be deposited in the Sub-Court under Section 30 of the Act. The Sub-Court has amended the word 'Section 30' as 'Section 18' as per the order in I.A. No.183 of 1987 dated 3.12.1987. The Form of Reference sent to the court in Reference No.21444/74/A8 dated 4.8.1981 by the Land Acquisition Officer, viz. the Revenue Divisional Officer was made under Section 30 of the Act. However, it was ordered to be corrected and amended as one made under Section 18 of the Act on the basis of the order in I.A. No.187 of 1987 dated 3.12.1987. The letter was addressed by the Revenue Divisional Officer to the Principal Subordinate Judge in Reference No.21444/74/A8 dated 4.8.1981 wherein the subject of acquisition referred to in the Reference under Section 30 of the Act was corrected as one under Section 18 as per the amendment in I.A. No.183 of 1987 dated 3.12.1987. However, the prayer in these Forms of Reference which state the reasons for Reference as follows : "The interested persons could not say the share of each person in these lands. Hence, the compensation could not be apportioned and is deposited in court under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act." "I request that the Reference under Section 30 may please be taken on file and disposed of according to law." In one of the Forms of Reference dated 4.8.1981, Section 30 has been replaced by Section 18 as per the amendment made in I.A. No.183 of 1987 dated 3.12.1987. The learned Judge, amending the Reference under Section 30 as one under Section 18 of the Act, at the instance of the claimants in these three L.A.O.Ps., proceeded to consider the same under Section 23-A of the Act and enhanced the compensation to Rs.7/- per sq.ft. in all these cases. Aggrieved by the order/award passed by the Sub-Court, the Government has preferred the appeals. Insofar as L.A.O.P. No.14 of 1984 is concerned, the learned Judge enhanced the compensation from Rs.1,42,365/- as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to Rs.25,83,784/-. The appeals are against this order.