S DHANDAPANI Vs. SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND WATER SUPPLY DEPARTMENT FORT ST GEORGE CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the Petitioners is that they are joint owners of 23,304 sq. ft. of nanja lands comprised in T. S. No. 2280/2 in Thiruvanai koil, Trichy District; that in earlier occasion, some of the respondents herein attempted to dispossess the petitioners and that the petitioners filed a suit in OS. No. 161/2004 before the Sub Court, Trichy, wherein interim injunction was granted and the said suit is still pending; that while things are such, the respondents issued GO (3d)No. 28 Municipal and Water Supply Department dated 20. 11. 2006 under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire 17093 sq. ft of the said lands out of 23304 sq. ft comprised in TS. No. 2280/2, invoking urgency clause under Section 17 (2) of the said Act, dispensing with enquiry under Section 5a of the Act for the the purpose of establishing Sewage Pump for underground drainage system and the same was published in the Tamil Daily 'dinakaran'on 25. 11. 2006; that the Respondents have neither assessed the value of the lands in dispute nor have deposited 80% of the land value as required by the Act; that in view of the said acquisition proceedings nothing survives in the suit; that the respondents failed to follow the mandatory provisions of section 17 of the Act; that alternative lands of Government is available in plenty, but the respondents deliberately decided to acquire petitioner's land and hence, several cases were filed from 1967 onwards which were disposed of, now the present writ petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records from the 1st Respondent relating to the GO. (3-Pa) No. 28 Municipal administration and Water Supply Department dated 20. 11. 2006, as published in the "dhinakaran" daily dated 25. 11. 2006 and quash the said order.

(2.) THE case of the Respondents is that the 1st respondent issued GO. NO. 24 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 23. 7. 2004, according administrative sanction for the implementation of underground drainage scheme in Trichirapalli City Corporation; that the petitioners knowing that their land has been proposed for acquisition filed a vexatious suit in OS. No. 164/2004 and obtained interim injunction, without impleading the District Collector and the Special Tahsildar (LA) as the respondents and later they filed impleading petitions, which were allowed; that the petitioners, in the mean time, have filed WP. No. 29937/04 before this court, which was disposed of 26. 4. 2006, directing the respondents to negotiate and arrive at a settlement and report it before 13. 6. 2006 and as per the direction, notices were issued to the land owners on 6. 6. 2006; that out of 8 land owners only 3 persons were present, out of them two persons have stated that the compensation due to the acquisition land has to be paid at the prevailing market rate and one person informed orally that he would take a decision after consulting his advocate, but nobody raised any objection for the proposed acquisition and final decision has not been arrived at and the same was reported to this court and ultimately the said writ petition was dismissed; that based on the administrative sanction order dated 23. 7. 2004, the Government in GO. (3d) No. 9 Municipal Administration (MA3) Department dated 17. 6. 2005 approved the draft notification Under Section 4 (1) and draft declaration under section 6 of the Act, which was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 17. 6. 2005 and the above notification was published in the two local dailies Dinathanthi and Makkal Kural dated 23. 6. 2005 and the locality publication was made on 24. 6. 2005; that the petitioners have filed another wp. No. 23379/05, stating that their names are not found mentioned in the said notification, but their father's name, who died already, alone was found mentioned and the said writ petition was allowed and accordingly, the 1st respondent issued GO. (3d) No. 27, Municipal Administration and Water Supply department dated 20. 11. 2006, canceling the earlier notification dated 17. 6. 2006 in accordance with law, which was published in the Tamil Nadu Government gazette No. 322 dated 20. 11. 2006 and in the local dailies Dhinakaran and Malai malar dated 25. 11. 2006 and the locality publication was made on 28. 11. 2006 and the draft declaration under section 6 of the Act has been approved by the government in their GO. (3d) No. 31 Municipal Administration and Water Supply department 5. 12. 2006, which was published in the Government Gazette NO. 334 dated 5. 12. 2006 and in the local dailies Dhinakaran and Tamil Murasu on 9. 12. 2006 and the locality publication was made on 21. 12. 2006; that the works relating to the said scheme completed about 52 kilometers out of 59 kilometers and the sewage pumping station is yet to be constructed and that the sewage pumping station was fixed in the proposed land acquisition site based on gravity of the land and suitability of location and there is no alternative suitable site except the proposed land to be acquired; that the under ground sewerage scheme was designed with a cost of Rs. 120 crores in Trichirapalli corporation and thereafter field survey was made and the proposed land acquisition site was selected for setting up of sewage pumping station and administrative sanction for installation of sewerage pumping station was accorded to an extent of 17093 sq. ft in TS. No. 2280/2; that in respect of averment that 11. 44 acres of lands belonged to Corporation is situated very nearer to the proposed sewerage pumping station, it is incorrect and it is not suitable for locating the pumping station.

(3.) THE learned Advocate General for the Respondents has submitted that this is a case where the lands are acquired invoking the urgency clause and hence, preliminary inspection, preliminary enquiry, scrutiny of records, obtaining sufficient funds from the requisition body, ascertaining ownership were considered and draft notification was issued under Section 4 (1)of the Act; that in earlier occasions, whenever the proceedings are initiated, the petitioners rushed to the court and obtained orders restraining the respondents from proceeding further; that the averment the respondents are avoiding poramboke lands, but deliberately chosen the lands of the petitioners is false; that the said 11. 44 acres of lands are far away from the present land, moreover, it is not all suitable for locating the pumping station and that considering the technical feasibility and road gradient the lands of the petitioners were selected; that the averment that there is no order under section 17 (4) of the Act, dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5a is denied as untrue; that indeed the same is specifically mentioned that the petitioners refused to receive the notices, which were served by way of affixture in the doors in the presence of the private witnesses; that the administrative sanction for installation of sewerage pumping station was accorded vide GO. (3d) No. 24 Municipal And Water Supply Department dated 23. 7. 2004; that the value of the land is more than Rs. 10 lakhs and hence, the government is the competent authority to issue notification and not the collector as averred by the Petitioners; that considering the urgency, the enquiry under Section 5a was dispensed with and mentioning it, notification was made; that it is false to state that there are buildings available in the lands in dispute and that it is waste land and that the petitioners'land is just behind the existing sewerage pumping station at Vasudevan Street and that since the scheme is the expansion of the existing scheme, the site is selected after a complete technical investigation based on contour level and no objections have been received from the general public and prayed for dismissal of this writ petition.