MURUGAN Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. V. Raghavachari for the petitioner as well as Mr. P. S. Jayakumar for the respondents. The question relates to acquisition of land under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Act 31 of 1978 hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).

(2.) EVEN though several contentions have been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is not necessary to deal with all such contentions, as in my opinion, the contention relating to incompetency of the District Revenue Officer to exercise powers under Section 4 (2) of the Act be well founded and well supported by the decisions of this Court, merits acceptance.

(3.) IT is not disputed that in the present case, the decision to acquire the land was taken by the District Revenue Officer, Villupuram. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that as per the provisions contained under Section 4 (2) of the Act, only the District Collector can take the ultimate decision relating to acquisition of lands. Even though, the District Collector may authorise any of his Officers to call upon the owner or any other person to show cause as to why the lands should not be acquired, under Section 4 (3) (a), the District Collector is required to pass orders as he may deem fit on the cause so shown. Under Section 4 (3) (b), where any officer authorised by the District Collector has called upon the owner, to show cause such Officer is required to make a report to the District Collector containing his recommendations and ultimately, the District Collector is required to pass such orders. It is thus evident that under Section 4, the statutory authority is the District Collector. There is no provision that such power of the District Collector under Section 4 (2) or 4 (3) of the Act can be delegated to any other authority.