LAWS(MAD)-2013-4-62

M.OCHA THEVAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On April 18, 2013
M.Ocha Thevar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek re-conveyance of their lands on the ground that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board failed to utilise the acquired lands for a considerable period.

(2.) THE lands owned by the petitioners were acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu for launching a housing project in the name and style of 'Madurai South Neighbourhood Scheme'. The draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] was published on 14 June, 1991. After conducting the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 05 August, 1994. The Land Acquisition Officer passed awards on 05 August, 1994 vide Award No.8/1994 [W.P.(MD)Nos.1369, 263 and 993 of 2013] and on 17 November, 1994 in Award No.11/1994 [W.P.(MD)No.881 of 2013]. According to the petitioners, they are still in possession of the lands. It is the grievance of the petitioners that notwithstanding the passing of awards, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board has not utilised the lands for any useful purpose. The lands are still lying vacant. Therefore, the petitioners wanted re-conveyance of the lands. The petitioners have submitted representations before the Government with a request to re-convey the lands. Since there was no follow-up action, the petitioners are before this Court.

(3.) THE Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Madurai Housing Unit, in his counter-affidavit, contended that the possession of the subject lands were taken over by the Housing Board on 23 March, 1995. The award amount was deposited and it was only thereafter possession was taken. According to the Housing Board, the property was acquired for a comprehensive housing scheme. The Housing Board has already developed the lands and the proposal is to construct a Satellite City at Thoppur. The Housing Board wanted the lands for the project and as such, there is no question of re-conveyance.