K.PALANISAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of declaration or any other order in the nature of a writ of declaration declaring that the land acquisition proceedings in respect of 2.17 acres of land comprised in S.No.34/3 in Kondichettipatty Village belonging to the petitioner have lapsed in view of Section 11(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(2.) ACQUISITION proceedings were initiated for acquiring 2.17 acres of land comprised in S.No.34/3 in Kondichettipatty Village, Namakkal Taluk along with other lands for the construction of houses under Namakkal Neighbourhood Scheme and a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 came to be issued on 04.01.1983 and the same was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 26.01.1983. On service of notice under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, the petitioner raised objections on the ground that he had put up a tiled house and a thatched house with a Well to which a 5 HP Electric Motor Pumpset has been attached and he was residing there. Based on the above said particulars, he raised an objection for the proposed acquisition for providing houses under the Namakkal Neighbourhood Scheme. However, the second respondent (Land Acquisition Officer), rejecting his objection, proceeded further by submitting a draft declaration to the Government for the acquisition of the said land. The draft declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was approved by the Government under G.O.Ms.No.704, Housing and Urban Development department dated 18.07.1985. The same was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.11487 of 1985. Hon'ble Justice Mohan, Judge of this Court (as he then was), after hearing the said writ petition passed an order directing the District Collector, Salem to make a personal inspection and find out whether the construction put up by the petitioner would, in any way, interfered with the alignment of the housing scheme for which the land was proposed to be acquired and submit a report to the Government recommending that the petitioner should be permitted to retain the houses and for acquisition of the remaining land of the petitioner alone in case the Collector would find that the construction put by the petitioner would not interfere with the alignment of the housing scheme. Pursuant to the said order of the High Court dated 20.11.1985, the then District Collector, Selam made a personal inspection of the property and submitted a report to the Government stating that the tiled house, thatched house and the well fitted with 5 HP motor occupy an area measuring 23 cents and leaving the said area alone with the petitioner, would not interfere with the alignment of the housing scheme and that hence leaving 23 cents, remaining extent of 1.94 acres may be acquired.

(3.) PURSUANT to the issuance of the said notice dated 06.07.1987, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.7764 of 1987, challenging the said notice under Section 9(3) and 10 of the Act and praying for quashing the said notice dated 06.07.1987 and also seeking a direction to the first respondent to give effect to the report of the District Collector dated 30.12.1985 to exclude 23 cents of land in S.No.34/3, Kondichettipatty Village, Namakkal Taluk from the acquisition proceedings. The said writ petition came to be heard by Hon'ble Justice Jayarama Chouta, Judge of this Court and disposed of by order dated 10.02.1997. In the said order, his Lordship Justice Jayarama Chouta directed that out of 2.17 acres comprised in S.No.34/3 belonging to the petitioner, the built up area measuring 23 cents should be excluded by giving effect to the report of the District Collector and that in respect of the balance extent of land, the respondents could proceed in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. In the meanwhile, an award came to be passed on 03.08.1987 in Award No.3/87-88. Though the passing of the said award was projected as a ground of defence in W.P.No.7764 of 1987, this Court chose to allow the writ petition and quash the notice dated 06.07.1987 issued under Section 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act.