Act 1978 cannot be held void due to amendment under L.A. Act 1894.

The Chief Justice:

This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 25.10.2002.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, and have perused the impugned judgment and other papers on record.

3. The writ petitioner had prayed for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent and to quash the impugned notice under Section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (in short ‘the Act’). Under the said Act, the respondents initiated proceedings in respect of the land in question, as the same was required for a Harijan Welfare Scheme. Notice under Section 4(2) of the Act was served in Form-I by the second respondent on the petitioner, and the petitioner submitted his objections. The second respondent over-ruled the objections and submitted a report to the first respondent, who in turn observed that the objections were without merits and ordered acquisition of the petitioner’s land. Accordingly, a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published and an award notice was served on the writ petitioner, after which the petitioner came to this Court.

4. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the acquisition was not liable to be interfered with as the provisions of Section 4(1), as well as Section 4(2) of the Act have been followed strictly.

5. In this writ appeal, the learned counsel has submitted that the learned single Judge has not considered one of the legal points, which was taken before the learned single Judge namely, that the Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978 was invalid, as it was repugnant to the law subsequently made by Parliament which had enacted Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act No. 68 of 94 to amend the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1984. Although, this point has not been discussed by the learned single Judge, in the interest of justice, we have permitted this point to be raised before us, as it is purely a legal and constitutional point.

6. The Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, 1978 has been upheld by the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Ananthi Ammal (AIR 1995 SC 2114). Section 2 of the Act states that this Act is for giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principles laid down in Part – IV of the Constitution, and in particular Article 46 of the Constitution of India.

7. Article 46 states:-

“ Promotion of Educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections:- The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation”

8. Section 3(g) of the Act defines Harijan Welfare Scheme as follows:-

“Harijan Welfare Scheme” means any scheme for provision of house-sites for Harijans for constructing, extending or improving any dwelling-house for Harijans or for providing any burial or burning grounds for Harijans or for providing any pathway leading to such dwelling-house, burial or burning grounds, or for providing any other amenity for the benefit of Harijans”

Under Section 4(1) where the District Collector is satisfied that for the purpose of a Harijan Welfare Scheme, it is necessary to acquire any land, he may acquire the land by publishing in the District Gazette a notice to the effect that he has decided to acquire the land. Under sub-section (2) of Section 4 before publishing a notice under sub-section (1), the District Collector or any officer authorized by him has to issue show cause notice to the owner or other interested person. Under Section 5 when notice under Section 4(1) is published in the gazette, the land vests in the Government free from all encumbrances.

9. The Constitutional scheme is very clear. It aims at equality. (Vide Articles 14 to 18 of the Constitution of Indi