PEDDA ANNIAH Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ appeal has been filed against the order dated 20. 01. 2000 made in W. P. No. 19279 of 1992, in and by which the learned single Judge upheld the acquisition proceedings and dismissed the writ petition.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

(3.) THE only point urged before the learned single Judge as well as before us is whether the paper publication can precede the Gazette notification. In the case on hand, the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was published in the Tamil Nadu Gazette dated 26. 06. 1991. However, the same was published in the newspaper on 19. 06. 1991 and 20. 06. 1991. It was contended that since the publication in the paper has to come after the publication in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, the acquisition proceeding is vitiated. The learned single Judge, following the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1997 SC 503 (VENKATASWAMAPPA VS. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER), rejected the stand taken by the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition. It is not in dispute that the Supreme court has held that the publication of notification in local newspaper earlier to the actual publication of the Gazette is merely irregular and it does not vitiate the validity of the notification published in the Gazette. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, in the absence of any contra decision, we have no other option except to confirm the order of the learned single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed.