The main legal point established in the judgment is that the claimants who receive compensation under protest and make application under Section 18(1) are entitled to seek a reference; third parties who have been impleaded have no right to claim higher compensation by circumventing the process of reference under Section 18.

(Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against order dated 21-6-2004 passed by Single Judge made in Writ Petition No. 17256 of 2003 and to set aside the same; and Appeal Suit has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against judgement and decree of learned Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai in L.A.O.P.No.1/2001 dated 15th September, 2003.)

COMMON JUDGMENT

P. Sathasivam, J

Since the issue raised in the above appeals relates to the very same subject matter, they are being disposed of by the following common order.

2. Brief facts: - An extent of 0.21.0 Hectares (roughly 52 Cents) of dry land in Survey No. 217/2 at Thensingampunari village, Tirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to provide house-sites to those who are belonging to Backward Classes. After enquiry, Award No. 4/2000-2001 dated 05-9-2000 was passed and compensation amount of Rs.2,89,133/- was paid to the land owners, namely, Lakshmanan, Vanni, Palanisamy, Sekku, son of Arumugham and Sekku, son of Vanni.

3. According to the writ appellants, they jointly filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Special Tahsildar (ADW) (Land Acquisition Officer), Devakottai. It is their case that the land originally belonged to Arulmigu Sevugaperumal Temple, and that the appellants and their fathers as well as grand-fathers are all “Meikavalars” of the said temple. The village was taken over by the Government under Act 26/1948. The said 52 Cents were allotted to Service Imam to their fathers and grand fathers. The Service Tenure Inam lands are recognized under Section 17 (1)(b) or 17 (2) of the Estate Abolition Act. According to them, the appellants and their fore-fathers are legally entitled to the acquired lands. It is also their case that after settlement of Patta, they constructed 39 houses in the acquired land i.e., in Survey No.217/2. After passing of the award on 05-9-2000, respondents 2 to 5 in the Writ Appeal, namely, B. Pankajam, B. Rajeswari, B. Govindaraj and S. Jayalakshmi made a representation to the Special Tahsildar, Devakottai on 11-10-2000 requesting that the award amount should not be disturbed to the appellants. Thereafter, they filed Writ Petition No. 20480/2000 before this Court for quashing of the award dated 05-9-2000 and also for direction to the respondents 3 to 7 therein to return the amount of Rs.2,89,139/- received by them from the respondents 1 and 2 therein together with interest at 18% per annum till the payment. However, the said writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge on 05-12-2000 with a direction to the Collector, Sivagangai District/first respondent therein to consider and dispose of their representation dated 10/11-10-2000 on merits. Pursuant to the same, the first respondent by order dated 29-3-2001, rejected their representation. The respondents 2 to 5 in Writ Appeal have filed another Writ Petition viz., W.P.No. 11313/2001 praying to quash the order dated 29-3-2001 of the Collector. By order dated 28-9-2001, a learned Single Judge found that the Collector could not decide the title of the parties and allowed the writ petition and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act. Pursuant to the same, the Special Tahsildar referred the matter on 10-04-2002 to the Sub Court, Sivaganga, which returned the reference stating that the award amount had been received by the land owners; hence there is no question of further adjudication. Thereafter, respondents 2 to 5 in the Writ Appeal filed Contempt Petition No. 37/2003 before this Court, and a learned Single Judge, after recording the fact that the Land Acquisition Officer had already referred the matter to the Sub Judge, Sivaganga on 10-4-2002, and obeyed the direction given by this Court, dismissed the Contempt Petition with a liberty to the parties to work out their remedies