R KRISHNASAMY GOUNDER Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the proceedings dated 14.11.1996 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act as well as the declaration dated 22.11.1997 issued by the second respondent, whereby the property of the petitioners and other land owners were acquired for the purpose of Tamil Nadu Housing Board.

(2.) THE factul matrix necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as under:- Petitioners' version THE petitioners were the owners of the land in Survey Nos.150/3I, 150/3C and 152/2 in Vilankurichi Village, Coimbatore North Taluk and after purchase of the property, the petitioners along with other land owners jointly formed a lay out in the year 1995 for the purpose of selling the lands in small plots as house sites. THE property was purchased by the individual land owners by way of separate documents. Subsequently they got the approval of the lay out from the Director of Town and Country Planning as per the proceedings of the year 1995. THE petitioners have also executed a registered settlement deed in favour of the local panchayat for providing road, park, etc. THE petitioners executed several sale deeds in the year 1995 and 1996 to individual purchasers and a total number of 56 plots have been sold.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the first respondent was not justified in overruling the recommendation given by the Housing Board and no reasons are indicated in the counter affidavit as to the materials collected by the first respondent for the purpose of satisfying himself about the necessity to acquire the property of the petitioners, disregarding the recommendation given by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for exclusion. THE learned counsel also relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. v. DARIUS SHAPUR CHENNAI (2005(7) SCC 627) in support of his contention that there should be materials available in the award file to show that the objection preferred by the land owners were considered by the Government. In short, the learned counsel challenged the acquisition on the ground of violation on the part of the Government to come to a subjective satisfaction to acquire the property as well as absence of materials to show the decision taken by the first respondent, disregarding the recommendation made by the Housing Board. Submission of the Government Pleader