SRINIVASAMURTHY MANDIRAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Land belonging to the petitioner were taken possession of by third respondent on 1st October, 1978, though petitioner would claim that it took place on 18th November, 1977. In appropriate proceedings, the actual date of entry will have to be determined. It is not in dispute that for constructing tenements under Vazhai Thoppu Slum Clearance Scheme aided by Housing and Urban Deve- , lopment Corporation, the lands have been taken possession of and tenements have been constructed already, by third respondent. On 21st July, 1975, the earliest of notices was issued under Tamil Nadu Act XI of 1971, calling for objections, if any. On 10th August, 1975, petitioner stated that it had no objection for the lands being taken over, provided due compensation was paid which should be beneficial to the Trust. There have been subsequent communications sent through counsel seeking for immediate payment of compensation since lands were being utilised, and third respondent was deriving substantial income, now claimed to be about Rs. 10,000 per month, being the rent collected from occupants of these tenements. On 2nd July, 1979, second respondent had again sent another notice under Act XI of 1971, fixing 13th August, 1979, as the date for conducting enquiry, which was replied on 13th August, 1979, stating that adequate compensation must be expeditiously granted. Once again a Form 3 Notice rule 7 (2) under Act XI of 1971, was issued on 15th May, 1981, stating that the first repondent-Government had decided to acquire the lands under section 17 of the Act, and to that effect a notification had been published in the gazette, dated 22nd April, 1981, and therefore petitioner was required to appear for an enquiry on 4th June, 1981. Petitioner forwarded representations on 4th June, 1981, claiming a compensation of not less than Rs. 25,000 per ground and that early decision should be taken in the matter. There being tardy progress in the matter which was languishing for not less than 7 years, from the date of first notice, petitioner files this writ petition claiming that there must be an early culmination of proceedings initiated under Act XI of 1971.

(2.) In the counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent it is stated that entry was made on 1st October, 1978, and that a resolution No. 20, dated 22nd January, 1981, had been passed by the Slum Clearance Board approving the proposal to acquire the lands in question, and since there is a proposal to amend section 20 of Act XI of 1971, no further action was taken for determination of compensation, and that it would be the market value on the date of publication of the notice under section 17 of the Act.

(3.) Curiously, respondents 1 and 2 take up the stand that whether acquisition would be under section 20 of Act XI of 1971 or under Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, referred to as Ceiling Act such is being considered, and that was why the award of compensation was held up, and that expeditious action will be taken for determination of compensation, as soon as this question is solved. It is stated that, when petitioner had been called upon to produce evidence as to whether the said Ceiling Act would be applicable, records having not been produced, no decision could be taken and that there is no provision for payment of any ad hoc compensation as claimed by petitioner.