G S GOPALAKRISHNAN Vs. VERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question as to whether a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the name of a dead person is a nullity, falls for consideration in this appeal.

(2.) THE facts leading to this appeal are as follows: Five persons by name M. Narasimha Reddy, G.S. Gopalakrishnan, Tmt. Rajamma, M. Krishnappa and L. Nachiappan jointly filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 7153 of 1997 praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent relating to a notification issued under G.O. Ms. No. 130, Electronics, Science and Technology (C) Department dated 2.11.1988 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as the "Act") and the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act under G.O. Ms. No. 941, Industries (SIF2) dated 18.12.1989 and the award No.4 of 1991 dated 19.12.1991 of the second respondent and to quash all those proceedings in so far as they related to the land of an extent of 39 cents in Survey No. 671/1, Hosur Village and Taluk. It was their contention in the writ petition that the said land of the extent of 39 cents was developed into a layout of house sites along with other lands and the layout was approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning in DTP approval 53/87-C No. 2122/87 S.D.R.4 and that they had purchased plot Nos. 28, 26, 27, 25, 30 and 31 respectively in the said layout.

(3.) ON a consideration of the above facts, the learned Judge rejected the contention of the appellants and held that the mere fact that Section 4(1) notification was issued in the name of a dead person would not vitiate the entire proceedings inasmuch as the authorities responsible for issuing the notification might not be aware of the death of the owner. However, the learned Judge held that the failure to provide an opportunity to participate in the enquiry under Section 5-A vitiated the proceedings in so far as the writ petitioner Nos.1 and 5 were concerned, since the writ petitioner No. 1 purchased the property prior to Section 4(1) notification and the writ petitioner No. 5 purchased the property after Section 4(1) notification but before Section 6 declaration. No relief was granted to the writ petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4. on the ground that they purchased the property after the award enquiry itself was completed. Hence the present appeal by writ petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4.