Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN
Tube Suppliers Limited
Versus
Govt. of Tamil Nadu and another
W.P.No.13570 of 1986 and W.M.P.No.2804 of 1990 and 565 of 1997
Decided On : 17-04-1997
LAND ACQUISITION - NOTIFICATION - ENQUIRY - REMARKS OF REQUISITIONING BODY - REASONS - MANDATORY - LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - SECTION 4(1), 5A, 6 - TAMIL NADU LAND ACQUISITION RULES - RULE 3(B).
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a company, challenged the acquisition of its land for the formation of a Neighbourhood Scheme. The petitioner contended that there was no proper enquiry under section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that the remarks of the requisitioning body were merely cryptic remarks. The petitioner also contended that the Government had a policy to exclude the land belonging to factories and that the land needed for factory purpose.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the requisitioning body should offer their remarks with reasons and unless remarks are offered it would not be possible for the petitioner to make further representation over the remarks. Hence, it is incumbent on the requisitioning body to give reasons why the objections of the petitioner were overruled.
Issues: 1. Whether the enquiry held under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Rules was valid in law. 2. Whether the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the enquiry held without strict compliance of the provisions of Rule 3(b) of the Rules which is held to be mandatory, is not valid in law. Therefore, the declaration under Section 6 of the Act, which is challenged in this writ petition is liable to be quashed.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court also gave liberty to the respondents to proceed with further proceedings under the Act on the basis of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act.
.1. The writ petitioner is a company. The writ petitioner has filed a petition in W.M.P. No. 565 of 1997 for the substitution of the present name of the company, "MAC Industrial Products Ltd." in the place of "Tube Suppliers Ltd.". Under the scheme of amalgamation, the companys name was changed as V.R.W.Industries Limited with effect from 111. 1990 and by a subsequent amalgamation V.R.W.Industries Limited was merged with Tubes and Malleable Limited by an order of this court in Company Petition Nos.177 and 178 of 1974 and the name of the company was also changed to MAC Industrial Products Ltd. Since there is a change in the name of the petitioner by an order of this court, the petition in W.M.P. No. 565 of 1997 to amend the name of the petition in the cause title is ordered.
2. The writ petitioner owns a piece of land in Vanagaram Village, Saidapet Taluk. The petitioner is running a factory manufacturing fire bricks. The petitioner set up the factory store room, drying yeard, kiln, etc., for running the factory of manufacturing fire bricks. The petitioner has open space which is used for storing materials as well as for free access of lorries used for the purpose of its business. The property is situate in survey Nos. 9,10, 17, 18, 20,15/28, 76, 16/1 and 10.
.3. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued a notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the purpose of formation of Maduravoyal Neighbourhood Scheme and the notification was published in the Government Gazette dated 29. 1985. The petitioner was served with a notice under Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Rules on 210. 1985. According to the petitioner, the first respondent has not given publicity of the acquisition proceedings and has not put up the notification under section 4(1) of the Act in convenient places in the said locality. However, after the receipt of the notice under Rule 3, the petitioner has made a detailed representation on 11. 1985 and participated in the enquiry held on 111. 1985. The main contention of the petitioner is that the description of property was not properly given and the description of boundaries did not tally correctly. Since the sketch showing the exact location of the land proposed to be acquired was not supplied, the petitioner has made further representation on 111. 1985 protesting against the acquisition and giving the reasons against implementing the Neighbourhood Scheme. The second respondent forwarded a communication of the Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board wherein it is stated that the objection are overruled. The petitioner made further representation against the remarks of the authority and further enquiry was held on the basis of the objection of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and the representation made by the petitioner. The declaration under section 6 of the Act was duly published. According to the petitioner, the declaration was published on 29. 1986 and in the declaration, with regard to northern boundary, there is a difference with the boundaries given in the notification under section 4(1) of the Act. Hence, the petitioner has come before this Court on the ground that there was no simultaneous publication or notice at convenient places in the said locality along with the notification under section 4(1) of the Act and the petitioner was not able to give effective representation in the absence of the sketch indicating the area sought to be acquired and the remarks of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board are merely cripple remarks and there is no specific need to acquire the petitioners land and the description of property made in the declaration under section 6 of the Act did not tally with the description found in the notification under section 4(1) of the Act.
.4. The respondents have filed a counter-affidavit stating the facts relating to the proceedings taken under the Land Acquisition Act. On a perusal of the counter-affidavit, it is clear
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
