SELVAM Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ERODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by three persons, namely, Mrs.Selvam, Mrs.Geetha and Mrs.Ranganayagi seeking to quash the impugned proceeding passed by the respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer in Na.Ka.LA/2/89 dated 08.09.2008, with a consequential direction to the respondent to refer the request of the petitioners for enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in so far as the land situated in Survey No.764/3 having an extent of 1.03.0 hectares situated in Kasipalayam Village, Erode Taluk is concerned.

(2.) It has been pleaded by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that when the respondent had acquired the petitioners land covered in S.No.764/3 having an extent of 1.03.0 hectares situated in Kasipalayam Village, Erode Taluk, they also passed Award No.1/95 dated 22.5.95, but the respondent failed to refer the case of the petitioners for enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Sub Court, Erode. Therefore, the petitioners came to this Court by filing W.P.No.40170 of 2002. This Court, by order dated 9.9.2003, directed to consider the case of the petitioners, on the basis of the legal notice dated 20.6.2002 sent to the respondent, in accordance with law by taking note of the earlier orders passed by this Court dated 18.10.2001 and 13.3.2002, wherein this Court, while considering a similar prayer to issue a direction to make a reference against the Awards dated 3.3.2000 and 22.5.95 to the respondent under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of S.Nos.723 & 763/1 of Erode Taluk respectively, issued a direction to refer the matter to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act immediately. But, in spite of the orders passed in the above writ petitions, it was stated that although the land of the petitioners is also similarly and identically placed, the respondent has refused to refer the matter under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) It was also pleaded before this Court that the respondent, having enormous power under Section 18 to refer the matter, has even failed to consider the equity rest with the petitioners, as they are the land owners and whose land had been acquired by the notification dated 8.4.92 by paying only a pittance of 0.86 paise per sq.ft, when the lands of similarly placed persons covered by the very same notification dated 8.4.92 were able to get Rs.30/- per square feet, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos.6127 and 6128 of 2011 dated 1.8.2011. If the petitioners request for referring the matter, by giving suitable direction to the respondent, to the Sub Court under Section 18 is not accepted, they would be put to great prejudice and irreparable loss. Adding further, it was also submitted that when similar issues have been repeatedly considered by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court, the prayer made by the petitioners also may be accepted. Referring to an order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.7866 and 7867 of 2005 dated 18.7.2012, it has been stated that, in the present case, it is not the case of the respondent that they had served the copy of the award while serving the notice under Section 12(2). But so far as the case of the petitioners is concerned, neither the notice under Section 12(2) was served nor a copy of the award was made available or served to the petitioners. Therefore, even if it is presumed that the respondent had served the notice under Section 12(2), not serving a copy of the award, is not going to support their case not to refer the matter under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Sub Court for enhancement of compensation.