M SUBRAMANIAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first writ petition, viz., W.P.No.38688 of 2002, came up for hearing on 17.12.2008, arguments were heard and orders were reserved. Subsequently, it was brought to the notice that the very same petitioners have also filed another writ petition being W.P.No.41421 of 2002 and that was listed on 19.12.2008. In that writ petition also, arguments were heard and orders were reserved. Since both the writ petitions were filed by the same petitioners in respect of the same cause of action, they were grouped together and a common order is being passed.

(2.) THE first writ petition is filed against Section 4(1) notification issued by the District Collector, Madurai, dated 09.8.2002 notifying the acquisition of the land belonging to the petitioners in Survey No.15/3B, Chintamani Village, Madurai (South) Taluk, Madurai District for the purpose of providing house -sites to the Adi -dravidars. It is stated by the petitioners that the notification had not specified the names of beneficiaries.

(3.) THE most relevant objection raised therein was that the Central Act 1 of 1894, apart from the market value, provides for 30% solatium and also interest at the rate of 15% for the first year and thereafter at 9% till the payment or deposit is made. Apart from that, Section 23(1)(A) of the Central Act provides for an additional amount at 12%, which is also not provided. Since the purpose of the Central Act and the State Act is the same, viz., acquiring the land of a person for public purpose, the amount of compensation should not vary depending upon the legislation under which the lands are acquired.