ORDER: In all the writ petitions, the issue involved is one and the same. Hence, all the writ petitions are dealt with by this common order.

2. The petitioners, have challenged the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents issued under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in G.O. Ms.No.879, Housing and Urban Development Department dated 28.5.1991 and published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 19.6.1991. According to the petitioners, they have purchased the lands by registered sale deeds on 8.2.1989 and the mutation was effected on 30.3.1989 and pattas also were granted. However, in the said notification, the names of the petitioners have not been shown and they were not given opportunity to participate in the enquiry conducted under Sec.5-A of "the Act" by issuing notice of Sec.5-A enquiry. They came to know of the land acquisition proceedings only when hey were served with the notice dated 21.7.94 under Sec.12(2) of "the Act". Hence, they pray for quashing of the land acquisition proceedings.

3. Mr.M.Kandasamy, learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that in the absence of the names of the petitioners shown in the notification issued under Sec.4(1) of "the Act" and the failure of the respondents to give opportunity to the petitioners to participate in the 5-A enquiry, the entire land acquisition proceedings are vitiated.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader on the basis of the additional counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent submitted that the land acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1988 when the proposal was forwarded to the 1st respondent for acquiring the land. The name of Thiru.Perumal Gounder was found in the revenue records on the date of the proposals as owner and his name was shown in the notification issued under Sec.4(1) of "the Act". Since the petitioners purchased the lands during February, 1989 and obtained pattas only during March, 1989, their names have not been included in the Sec.4(1) notification and they have not been served with Sec.5-A enquiry notice. According to the learned Additional Government Pleader, the relevant date for the purpose of ascertaining as to the owner of the land and to include the name in the Sec.4(1) notification and to provide subsequent opportunity to participate in the Sec.5-A enquiry is the date when proposal was made by the respondents for acquiring the lands. Therefore, on the date when the proposal was sent, the lands in question was shown in Sec.4(1) notification. Hence, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the non inclusion of the names of the petitioners in Sec.4(1) notification does not vitiate the land acquisition proceedings.

5. In view of the above rival submissions, it is to be seen as to the relevant date which is to be taken for determining the ownership of the land for the purpose of Sec.4(1) notification and for further opportunities to be given under Sec.5-A. In order to appreciate and decide the above, it would be relevant to extract the provisions of Sec.4 of "the Act" which reads as under:

"4. Publication of preliminary notification and powers of officers thereupon: (1) Whenever it appears to the appropriate Government that land in any locality is needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose or for a company a notification to that effect shall be published in the Official Gazette and in two daily newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality (the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice, being hereinafter referred to as the date of publication of the notification)..."

As per Sec.4(1) of "the Act", when it appears to the appropriate Government that the land in any locality is needed or is likely to be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document