K N SOUNDARARAJAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 25.07.2001 passed in W.P.No.15121 of 1995.

(2.) THE lands in question have been registered in the name of one Lakshmi alias Rajalakshmi and her name finds place in the permanent land registers maintained by the Revenue Department. In respect of the said lands, acquisition proceedings were initiated and a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued. After serving notice on the said Lakshmi under Section 5(A) of the Act, enquiry under Section 5(A) was conducted on 31.10.1994 and till then, no objection had been sent by the said Lakshmi. After the completion of the 5(A) enquiry and the submission of Report by the Land Acquisition Officer on 31.10.1994 to the State Government, the said Lakshmi sent an objection belatedly on 18.11.1994 and it reached the hands of the Land Acquisition Officer only on 21.11.1994. In the objection, Lakshmi has stated that she is the owner of the land and she requires the land for herself and for her sons and that is the only land owned by her. But, she had not disclosed that the petitioners in the writ petition are also interested in the lands and that a preliminary decree has been passed by the Civil Court.

(3.) ACCORDING to the 2nd respondent, the learned Single Judge has rightly pointed out that there was nothing on record to show that a representation had been sent by the petitioners to the local Revenue Divisional Officer. He has further stated that though the petitioners had a preliminary decree in their favour, they had not approached the Tahsildar concerned for mutation of their names or for deletion of the name, Lakshmi alias Rajalakshmi in the Revenue records and in such circumstances, they cannot allege that no notice was served to them, while actually, the land owner was Lakshmi alias Rajalakshmi as per the permanent register maintained by the Tahsildar.