LAWS(MAD)-2019-11-297

COMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION Vs. G.JEBAKUMAR JEBAMANI

Decided On November 11, 2019
Commissioner Of Land Administration Appellant
V/S
G.Jebakumar Jebamani Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review application is directed against the order dated 02. 01.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.24818 of 2018. The said writ petition was filed by the respondents herein. The case of the respondents is that their land measuring 4.45.0 Hectares comprised in Ponnakudi Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District was taken possession in the year 2010-2011. The writ petitioners/respondents herein appear to have given their consent for such taking over of their land. Neither the review applicant nor the original writ petitioners have produced the terms of consent. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued. Since enquiry under Section 5(A) of the earlier Act was dispensed with, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 10.07.2013. Thereafter, there was negotiation between the land owners on the one hand and the administration on the other. Pursuant to the same, the District Collector, Tirunelveli, issued proceedings bearing Na.Ka.J3/15533/2012, dated 02.09.2015. In terms of the said proceedings, a sum Rs.2,88,15,875/- was paid. The land owners thereafter submitted a representation stating that some more amount will have to be paid as compensation by applying the formula set out in the new Act i.e., Central Act 30 of 2013. Since the representation was not acted upon, the instant writ petition came to filed.

(2.) This Court after putting the Administration on notice and after hearing the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, by order dated 02.01.2019 allowed the writ petition and directed the authorities to determine the compensation payable to the writ petitioners in terms of the new Act i.e., Central Act 30 of 2013 and pay the same after deducting the interim compensation already paid to the writ petitioners. The entire exercise was directed to concluded within a certain time limit.

(3.) Alleging that the direction given by this Court has not been complied with Cont.P.(MD)No.835 of 2019 was filed. At that stage, the respondents in the original writ petition filed this review application.