GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU Vs. VENU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge, dtd. 14/3/2018, made in W.P.No.36632 of 2003, allowing the writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings initiated by the appellants under Sec. 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brevity).

(2.) The respondents' father, by name R.Krishnan, was the cultivating tenant in respect of the property comprised in S.No.39/2 and 41, Sivadi Village, Dharmapuri District, which is the subject matter of the writ petition. It is admitted that the respondents' father filed an application to include his name as cultivating tenant under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Lands Record of Tenancy Rights Act, 1969. The learned Special Government Pleader has not filed any document doubting the validity of the proceedings of the Record Officer dtd. 6/12/1980, including the name of the respondents' father in the Tenancy Records. It is the case of the respondents that their father died and thereafter, the respondents, who are the writ petitioners, are entitled to succeed to the property as cultivating tenants. It is not the case of appellants that the respondents are not cultivating tenants as defined under Under Tamil Nadu Agricultural Lands Record of Tenancy Rights Act, 1969. A person in possession as a tenant is entitled to be in possession till he is evicted by due process.

(3.) The property comprised in S.No.39/2 and 41, Sivadi Village, Dharmapuri District, which is the subject matter of the writ petition, was required for a Harijan Welfare Scheme. Therefore, proceedings were initiated under the Act for acquisition. Ultimately, a notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act was published in the District Gazette on 26/11/1999. The grievance of the respondents/writ petitioners is that no notice was issued to the writ petitioners before issuing a notice under Sec. 4(1) of the Act. It is also stated that no notice was also issued to the writ petitioners before passing the Award fixing compensation for the land. Therefore, the respondents filed the writ petition in W.P.No.36632 of 2003 challenging the acquisition proceedings.