SULOCHANA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order of the learned single Judge dated 6. 09. 2000 made in W. P. No. 18961 of 1993, the writ petitioner/appellant has filed the present appeal.

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

(3.) IT is seen that questioning the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents for the purpose of providing house sites to the Backward Class people, the petitioner has filed the writ petition even at the stage of the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). Before the learned Judge, it was contended that though the petitioner is the owner of the land and the same was correctly mentioned in the revenue records and patta has been issued in her favour, the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act has been issued in the name of her husband. It is also contended that apart from publishing the 4 (1) notification in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, it was published in two newspapers viz. , Dinathuthu and Malaimani, which have not been circulated in the village where the property is situated. The learned single Judge, after taking note of the above objection and in view of the fact that the petitioner has approached the Court even at the stage of the 4 (1) notification, after observing that the petitioner is free to raise all the above mentioned objections at the time of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and that it is for the authority to consider and rectify the defect and proceed further, dismissed the writ petition. The said order was passed by the learned single Judge on 06. 09. 2000.