LAKSHMANA PADAYACHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer is for a certiorari to call for the records relating to the land acquisition proceedings in award dated 5.1.1995 in Reference No.5/95 on the file of the third respondent and quash the same in so far as it relates to the petitioner's land comprised in S.Nos.14/1 and 14/2, Veli Semmandalam Village, Cuddalore Taluk, South Arcot District.

(2.) THE case as set out in the affidavit, in support of the writ petition is as follows: THE petitioner is the owner of the two items mentioned supra and he is cultivating double crops of paddy, groundnut, and tapiacio in the said lands. Every year the petitioner has been reclaiming and spending husge sums for the lands by adopting scientific method for improving the yield. THE lands were sought to be acquired by the Government for the formation of neighbourhood scheme. Sec.4(1) Notification was published on 13.11.1991. Sec.6 declaration was approved on 28.12.1992 and was published in the Tamil Nadu Gazette on 30.12.1992. THE petitioner challenged Sec,6 declaration stating that it was published beyond the period of one year vide W.P.No.20088 of 1993 and in W.M.P.No.31375 of 1993 stay of dispossession alone was granted on 10.11.1993. THE writ petition was ultimately dismissed on 24.1.1996 by a Division Bench of this Court holding that Sec.6 declaration had been passed within the stipulated period. However, pending the writ petitioner award was passed on 5.1.1995. This passing of the award was not communicated to the petitioner herein immediately as contemplated under Sec.12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act nor was compensation amount offered immediately to him. Only after the dismissal, of the writ petition on 24.1.1996 the award was communicated to the Petitioner on 31.1.1996. Till the date of filing of the present writ petition the respondents had not made the revenue deposit in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) IN Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acqusition Officer and another Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acqusition Officer and another Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acqusition Officer and another A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1500: (1962)1 S.C.C. 676 relied on by the learned Senior Counsel the Supreme Court took the view that for purposes of calculating the period of limitation prescribed for making application requesting the Collector to refer the question relating to the evaluation of the land acquired under the Act to the civil court under Sec.18 of the Act, the date on which the notice of the award was served on the owner of the land would be treated as the date of the award and that the period of limitation should be accounted from the date of the service of the said notice.