R SHANMUGAM Vs. AMMASI KUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Writ Appeals raise the following points for our consideration.

(2.) THE following are the few facts that led to the controversy before us.

(3.) WE have heard the respective learned senior counsel on either side. Before embarking upon the issue, it is necessary to trace the history of TNHB Act and the object for which the Housing Board was constituted. For improvement of the City of Madras, the Board of Trustees was constituted under the Madras City Improvement Trust Act, 1950 and the Board of Trustees was in-charge of Housing, Land Development and general improvement of the City. Every project proposed by the Board must get sanction of the Government before it is executed. Basically, the powers of the Board are limited and only to formulate the project for land Development, Housing and General improvement within the City and there was no independent power entrusted with the Board for execution of other Housing Projects of the Government not framed under the said Act. For the purpose of implementing the Scheme by the Board of Trustees, the Government in exercise of power of Eminent Domain, acquired the land under the provisions of "the Central Act". Section 16 of the Central Act empowers the Collector to take possession of the land in respect of which award is passed under Section 11 of the Act. Once possession is taken, the land shall vest in the Government free from all encumbrances. Under Section 17 of the Central Act, in case of urgency and if the appropriate Government so directs, the collector, though no award is made, may on the expiration of 15 days from the publication of the notice mentioned under Section 9, take possession of the land needed for public purpose and such land shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances.