M THANDAPANI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR COINBATORE DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the proceedings of the District Collector, Coimbatore dated 10.03.1998 whereby, the lands belonging to the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the Adi Dravidars of Kaikaatti Puthur Post.

(2.) THE factual matrix as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are as under: - (a) THE property which is the subject matter of acquisition originally belonged to the father of the petitioners by name Marrappa Gounder, a renowned freedom fighter who later functioned as Member of Legislative Assembly during the period 1957 to 1967. THE said Marrappa Gounder donated several items of property for various beneficial schemes in the area and especially for the betterment of the downtrodden people, as well as to improve educational facilities in the area. After the death of the said Marrappa Gounder, the property devolved on the petitioners, being the legal heirs. (b) While so, the petitioners received a notice from the second Respondent dated 01.02.1996 under Sec.4(2) of Act 31 of 1978 proposing to acquire the land in S.No. 255/1 in Avinashi Village, having an extent of 1.21.5 Hectares for the purpose of providing house sites to the house-less Adi Dravidars of Kaikatti Puthur Post, Avinashi and the enquiry was scheduled to be held on 20.02.1996. On receipt of the said notice, the second petitioner appeared before the second Respondent at his office and filed his statement of objection signed by the first petitioner. However, he was informed that the enquiry would take place on a later date and accordingly, after handing over the objection, the second petitioner left the office of the second Respondent. Nothing was heard in the matter of land acquisition subsequently. (c) However, the petitioners received a subsequent notice dated 30.09.1997 under rule 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of land for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act in Form-I whereby it was informed that the Government proposes to acquire the land for the purpose of providing house sites to Adi Dravidars and in the said notification, extent of land sought to be acquired was mentioned as 4.89 acres in S.No.255 and the enquiry was scheduled to be held on 17.10.1997 at 10.00 a.m. and the petitioners were directed to submit their objections. THE second petitioner appeared before the second respondent at 10.00 a.m. on 17.10.1997 but no enquiry was conducted. THE second Respondent was informed that a statement of objection had already been filed in response to the earlier notice and the same might be considered and treated as objections to the present notice. However, nothing was heard thereafter. Finally, the petitioners came to know that the first respondent has issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act acquiring the land of the petitioners and aggrieved by the notice in Form-I dated 30.09.1997, the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition. Subsequently. THE prayer in the Writ Petition was amended and Additional grounds were raised as per W.M.P.No.19269/2000 to challenge the notification dated 10.03.1998 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) THE Learned Government Advocate was not in a position to controvert the averments as found in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition on account of the failure of the respondents to file counter affidavit as well as to produce the file for the perusal of the learned Government Advocate so as to enable him to make his submissions before this Court. THErefore, the matter has to be decided on the basis of the materials available on record.