KAMICHETTY THIRUKAMESHWAR RAO YANAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT PONDICHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents for a public purpose, namely, for allotment of free house-sites to landless poor, the petitioners have filed the above writ petition.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder: According to him, he is the owner of ryotwari wet land bearing T.S.No.F/11/2/1 A.H. 2.6.00 situate at Adivipolam (Darialathippa) village, Yanam Sub-Taluk. He got the said land under a partition deed dated 18.8.1989. Subsequent to the partition, the mutation of the Revenue Record was also done showing his name as the owner of the said land as per his petition No.2009 of 1991 dated 25.6.1991. THE said lands are also included in his Patta No.103. While so, the second respondent herein initiated proceedings to compulsorily acquire an extent of H.1.66.00 out of his above mentioned lands, and published a notification under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ?the Act?) As per the said Notification the said lands are needed for a public purpose viz., for allotment of free house sites to the landless poor. Under the same Notification the enquiry contemplated under Sec.5-A of the Act was also dispensed with in view of the urgency. In the said Notification instead of his name, the name of his mother Thirumathi Kamichetty Nagarathinam was shown as the owner of the land. THEreafter, notification under Sec.6 of the Act was published on 13.3.1995. In the 6 declaration also, the name of his mother was shown as owner of the land. THE third respondent served a Notice under Secs.9(1)(3) and 10 of the Act calling upon his mother to appear in person or by the authorised agent on 28.4.1995 before him for award enquiry. At that stage only, copies of 4(1) Notification and 6 Declaration were furnished along with the award enquiry notice dated 26.4.1995, which was served only on 27.4.1995. THE entire acquisition proceedings are invalid in law especially when the proceedings had been taken in the name of the person who is not the owner of the land. THE land acquisition proceedings are also contrary to law, a colourable exercise of power, irregular, suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record and violative of principles of natural justice. In such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.

(3.) I have carefully considered the rival submissions.