N.S. MURALIDHARAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition in W.P. No. 2985 of 2000, by an order dated 26.11.2009, the writ petitioner has preferred this appeal.

(2.) THE case of the appellant/writ petitioner is that he is the owner of punja land measuring an extent of 1.09.5 hectares (2.70 cents) in Survey No. 2/3 at No. 99 Rajapalayam Village, Salem Taluk and Salem District. He had purchased the said land from one Mr. Chokkan vagayara under registered Sale Deed dated 12.07.1995 and after the said purchase, the patta in respect of the said land was transferred to his favour. On 05.08.1999, he leased out the said land excluding an extent of 2,400 sq. ft., in favour of a Trust known as Dr. Annai Subbulakshmiammal Public Charitable Trust for a period of ten years. The said trust is running a home for the aged, besides doing various services to the poor. The writ petitioner had entered into a Sale Agreement with one Ms. Yesoda, wife of K.K. Kuppu Iyer, in respect of the remaining extent of 2400 sq. ft. in the aforesaid land and the said extent was sold subsequently to Ms. Yesoda under a Registered Sale Deed dated 06.10.1999, as per the Sale Agreement stated supra. A notice dated 01.10.1999, in Form I was given by the second respondent purportedly under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] and the Rules made thereunder stating that the aforesaid land is necessary for the purpose of providing house sites to Adi Dravidars of Kondalampatti Village and that a statement in writing of objection as to why the said land should not be acquired, should be lodged by the persons interested within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The said notice was served upon the writ petitioner on 09.10.1999. On receipt of the same, the writ petitioner submitted a statement containing his objection regarding the acquisition of the said land to the second respondent. In the said objection, the writ petitioner brought to the notice of the second respondent about the lease to the Trust and a sale of portion of the said land to Mrs. K. Yesoda as stated above. Further, the writ petitioner had pointed out in the statement of objections that mango and coconut saplings have been planted in the said land. The Trust to which the said land had been leased out is a Public Charitable Trust and it is running a Home for the aged and an hospital for the poor, where free medical aid is being given to the poor.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner. As against the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant/writ petitioner is before this Court by way of the above writ appeal.