ORDER: According to the petitioner, Murthuzaviya Educational and Cultural Foundation of South India is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act. The said Society is running the petitioner school, which is called Murthuzaviya Oriental High School. The Society has also established several educational institutions including technical, vocational, social and cultural institutions, apart from running the petitioner school. The petitioner school has been in existence for over four decades and has been rendering great services to the public and is advancing the cause of public interest. The school is located in Big Street, Triplicane, Madras-5. The space and accommodation that is now available has been insufficient, particularly in view of the ever increasing demand for admission of students year after year. The petitioner thought some more space is required and that the adjoining lands situated at R.S.No.2769/1 of Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk and situated in Triplicane village would be most suitable. A request was made by the petitioner in June, 1978 to the Government to acquire the said land. The first respondent, after considering the petitioner’s request, directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.2,35,000 towards the cost of land acquisition. The petitioner complied with the said direction and deposited the amount on 4th August, 1980 with the first respondent. The first respondent proceeded with the matter and issued Sec.4(1) notification in G.O.Ms.No.1456, Education, Science and Technology, dated 29.7.1983 notifying that the lands in R.S.No.2769/1 of Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk in Triplicane village, measuring approximately 6 grounds and 395 sq.ft. was required for public purpose for the purpose of expansion of petitioner school and the said notification was published in the Government Gazette dated 17.8.1983. Objections were received and enquiry as contemplated under Sec.5-A of the Act was held. The father of the respondents 2 and 3 and husband of 4th respondent by name Arunachalam objected for the acquisition. Finally declaration under Sec.6 of the Act was made in G.O.MS.No.1087, Education, dated 5.8.1986.

2. It is further contended by the petitioner that respondents 2 and 3 and their father Arunachalam filed W.P.No.8819 of 1986 praying the Court to quash the notification issued under Secs.4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the said writ petition, the present petitioner was 4th respondent. An interim stay of the operation of acquisition proceedings and the notifications impugned was granted in W.M.P.No.13103 of 1986 and the same was made absolute subsequently. The Government however, decided not to proceed further in the matter and consequently issued a notification in the Gazette dated 12.4.1995. From the said notification, it appears that the Government issued a letter dated 27th March, 1995. Thereafter, the writ petitioners in W.P.No.8819 of 1986, did not press the writ petition and consequently the same was dismissed.

3. According to the writ petitioner, being surprised by the withdrawal of the acquisition proceedings, sent a letter to the Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition on 10th July, 1995 seeking clarification and wanting to know whether the acquisition proceedings had been withdrawn and if so on what grounds they were so withdrawn. The further plea of the petitioner is, since there was no reply he had to send a reminder and ultimately the petitioner received a reply dated 17.11.1995 from the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition that the acquisition proceedings had been withdrawn in terms of the powers conferred on the Government under Sec.48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and notification was issued in Government Gazette dated 12.4.1995 in Lr.No.99542/U2/90-28 Education, dated 27.3.1995. The contention of the petitioner is that such withdrawal was done behind his back and an opportunity should have been given to the petitioner, particularly when he had deposited the cost of acquisition virtually fift

Click Here to Read the rest of this document