CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. BHAGAVATHY SUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE all the appeals arise out of the Common Order passed by the learned single Judge, dated 08. 03. 2001, in W. P. Nos. 13248 of 1991 etc. , the same are being disposed of by the following Common Judgment. W. A. Nos. 226 to 231 of 2005 and 425 of 2005 have been filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and W. A. Nos. 254, 255, 456 and 457 of 2006 are by the Writ Petitioners.

(2.) BRIEF facts are as follows:- Thangam Colony Welfare Association and few others, aggrieved by the Notice issued under Section 47 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act), directing them to surrender possession of the property specified within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice, filed writ Petitions before this Court. For convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed in the Writ Petitions. (A) Case of the Writ Petitioners:- According to the president of Thangam Colony Welfare Association (hereinafter referred to as (Association), who filed W. P. No. 13248 of 1991, the Association was formed for the purpose of redressing the grievances of various persons who have purchased plots in the area known as Thangam Colony, which was under development. There is a road which runs east to west on the northern side in their colony. The members of the Association apart from others have purchased various plots in the said colony. Thangam Colony consists of 76 plots and about 60 houses and all of them are electrified. The colony had already been developed with street lights and roads. The Government of Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had taken steps to acquire lands in Survey Nos. 130, 131, 131/2 and 13 2/b1 etc. , for implementation of "west Madras Neighbourhood Scheme". The land owners, who had put up superstructures, as also the Association, consisting of 16 members, made representation to the Secretary, Housing and Urban Development department, Government of Tamil Nadu, for exclusion of the land in their occupation from the acquisition proceedings. The original proposal was to form a 60 ft. width road. It is the further case of the Association that Tamil Nadu housing Board considered their representation and decided to form only a 30 ft. road. Though no formal communication was received, the Association reliably learnt that respondents-1 and 2 decided to form a 30 feet road only and such decision was taken in 1989. It is also the case of the Association that while respondents-1 and 2 accepted the plea of the Association and others for formation of road with 30 ft. width, one Rajendran filed W. P. No. 6394 or 1989, seeking to quash the Memo dated 03. 03. 1989 and forbear respondents-1 and 2 (the state Government and the Housing Board) from in any manner altering the width of the 6 0 ft. road into a 30 ft. road. In the said writ petition, without referring to the various representations made by the residents of Thangam Colony, the housing Board filed a counter, stating that a 60 ft. road will be formed as and when the Revenue Department hands over the road site to the Board. By order dated 23. 4. 1991, the High Court grated time to the Housing Board till 30. 09. 1991 to form the 60 ft. road and the Government was directed to hand over the site to the Housing Board within a reasonable time enabling the Board to form the 60 ft. road within 30. 09. 1991. Neither the petitioner nor other residents or the school or church authorities were made parties to the said writ petition and they were not made aware of the proceedings. Only on receipt of the notice under Section 47 of the Land Acquisition Act for enforcing surrender of possession of the land belonging to the members of the Association as also other residents, they came to know that a portion of the land in their occupation is urgently required for formation of 60 ft. road at Thangam Colony. The said notice is not valid in law as the entire acquisition proceedings had already been dropped and though an award was passed, the matter was not pursued and consequently, the respondents have no right to enforce surrender of possession after lapse of 24 years from the date of the award. B. Stand of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board:- Though Tamil nadu Housing Board/2nd respondent in the Writ Petitions filed separate counter affidavit, for convenience and clarity, we refer the details furnished in the counter affidavit filed in W. P. No. 13248 of 1991. Certain lands in Villivakkam Village , formerly Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpattu M. G. R. District, and now in purasawakkam-Perambur Taluk of Chennai District, forming part of larger component of private lands, were notified under Section 4 (1) of the Land acquisition Act for acquisition for public purpose, viz. , formation of a housing scheme known as "west Madras Neighbourhood Scheme". A total extent of 7. 81 acres in S. Nos. 132, 133/1, 131/2-B, 130/2, 131/1 and 131/2-A were notified under Section 4 (1) of the Act and finally, awards were passed in Award nos. 25/66 dated 21. 9. 1966; 24/66 dated 21. 09. 1966 and 10/67 dated 2 9. 04. 1967. Within these lands, the area known as Thangam Colony, Anna Nagar, is situated. The representation of the Association to exclude their portion of the land from the acquisition proceedings was negatived and the Government directed he collector of Madras to take possession of the lands and hand over the same to the Housing Board. Again, the Secretary of the Association sent petitions to the Government on 03. 04. 1970 and 22. 07. 1970. Regarding the road alignment passing through Thangam Colony, the Housing Board informed the Government that it would not be possible to change the road alignment, vide letter dated 21. 08. 1970. It is on the further representation of the Association, the Government, in their letter dated 02. 02. 1972, intimated that the lands that are not falling within the road portions may be excluded from acquisition subject to payment of development charges by members of the Association as fixed by the Housing board; that the alignment of the road cannot be changed; and that suitable alternate sites to be given to the persons who are going to be displaced by the board; and negatived the request for payment of compensation for the superstructure. On account of the said order, out of the total extent of 7. 81 acres, an extent of 0. 90 acres is to be retained for formation of 60 width road. As per the Order of the Government dated 2. 2. 1972, the Housing Board, on 30. 9. 1972, issued allotment orders for allotment of A. P. Plots at Anna Nagar itself at concessional rates as alternate accommodation to the persons to be displaced, falling within the alignment of 60 width road, viz. , 12 persons. Apart from the above factual details, it is stated that the master plan provided by the MMDA contemplated only a 60 feet road in its layout. Rule 19 (i)B (iv) of Development Control Rules for Chennai area provided for 60 feet road. Roads having 1 K. M. length should have a minimum road width of 60 feet. The Anna Nagar layout formed by the TNHB was approved by the government and the same provides for 60 feet width road. The length of this 60' width road is about 4 K. M. running east to west from Chintamani Supermarket to anna Nagar West Extension and it is meant to be one of the primary connecting links for all the users and owners of the Anna Nagar Scheme to provide, inter alia, for bus transport, accessibility to schools, colleges, hospitals, companies, markets, temples, churches, mosques etc. Non-formation of intermediate stretch of 6th Avenue for about 800 sq. ft. passing through Thangam Colony from Plot No. 1328 to 1560 causes accidents due to heavy traffic problems. It is absolutely necessary to acquire the small land portions from the petitioners so as to form 60 feet width road as per the approved layout and the intermediate stretch of 60 feet width road should be formed in the interest of the public. The land owners ignoring the issuance of 4 (1) notification had purchased the lands under acquisition long after the notification. Further, as agreed by the Association of the land-owners, alternate plots for an extent of 1 4129 sq. ft. were given and those persons had taken the sale deeds for those Housing Board plots. In spite of this, the land owners did not hand over the possession of their piece of land for the formation of 60 feet road as agreed. The Housing Board has also filed identical counter affidavits in other writ petitions, highlighting their stand.

(3.) QUESTIONING the said directions as mentioned above, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board filed Writ Appeal Nos. 226 to 231 of 2005 and 425 of 2005. During the course of hearing of the Writ Appeals, the Association and others, i. e. , the Writ Petitioners, filed Writ Appeal Nos. 254, 256, 456 & 457 of 2006, seeking certain directions / clarification of the very same order passed by the learned Judge.