Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SAMPATH
M.J. Saravanaperumal and another
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Madras 600009 and 3 others
W.P.No. 155535 of 1988
Decided On : 06-10-1997
LAND ACQUISITION - SECTION 4(1) NOTIFICATION - ISSUANCE IN NAME OF DEAD PERSONS - VALIDITY - ENQUIRY UNDER SECTION 5-A - FAILURE TO REFER OBJECTIONS TO REQUISITIONING AUTHORITY - VIOLATION OF RULE 3(B) OF RULES - AWARD NOT PASSED WITHIN TWO YEARS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION OF SECTION 6 DECLARATION - VIOLATION OF SECTION 11-A - PROCEEDINGS QUASHED.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the Government for the extension of Ambattur Neighbourhood Scheme, alleging that the section 4(1) Notification was issued in the names of dead persons, the enquiry under section 5-A was not conducted properly, and the Award was not passed within two years from the date of publication of section 6 declaration, in violation of section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the section 4(1) Notification was indeed issued in the names of dead persons, which was a fatal error rendering the entire proceedings invalid. It also held that there was a failure to comply with rule 3(b) of the Rules framed under section 55 of the Act, as the objections raised by the petitioners during the section 5-A enquiry were not referred to the requisitioning authority, and the remarks of the requisitioning authority were not communicated to the petitioners. Additionally, the court found that the Award was not passed within the mandatory period of two years from the date of publication of the section 6 declaration, in violation of section 11-A of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the issuance of section 4(1) Notification in the names of dead persons rendered the entire proceedings invalid? 2. Whether the failure to refer objections raised during the section 5-A enquiry to the requisitioning authority and communicate the remarks of the requisitioning authority to the petitioners violated rule 3(b) of the Rules framed under section 55 of the Act? 3. Whether the failure to pass the Award within two years from the date of publication of the section 6 declaration violated section 11-A of the Act?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the decisions in Bhama Ramamoorthy v. The State of Tamil Nadu and another and W.P.Nos.202/84 etc. to hold that it was the duty of the officers in charge of land acquisition proceedings to verify the registry and incorporate the names of the petitioners under section 4(1) notification, and that the issuance of the Notification in the names of dead persons was a serious violation of the procedure under the Land Acquisition Act. 2. The court referred to the decisions in Kannammal (deceased) V.N. Devadoss v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, Kadirvelu Mudaliar v. State of Tamil Nadu and another, and other precedents to hold that the failure to refer the objections raised during the section 5-A enquiry to the requisitioning authority and communicate the remarks of the requisitioning authority to the petitioners violated rule 3(b) of the Rules framed under section 55 of the Act. 3. The court held that the failure to pass the Award within two years from the date of publication of the section 6 declaration violated section 11-A of the Act, and that the entire proceedings had lapsed due to this violation.
Final Decision: The court quashed the entire land acquisition proceedings, including the section 4(1) Notification, the section 6 declaration, and the consequential Award, on the grounds of serious violations of the procedure under the Land Acquisition Act.
1. The writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorartified mandamus to call for the records of the respondents comprised in the Notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 passed in G.O.Ms.No. 892, Housing and Urban Development dated 9. 1982 and published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 29. 1982 and the consequential declaration under section 6 of the Act in G.O.Ms.No. 966, Housing and Urban Development, dated 20.9.1985, and published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gaz ette dated 3. 1985 quash the entire acquisition proceedings thereon including passing of the Award relating to the petitioner’s lands in T.S.Nos. 205, 207/1, 207/2, 207/3, 207/4 and 208/2 of No. 81, Mugappair Village, Saidapet Taluk, Chingleput District, and direct the respondents no to acquire the abovesaid lands for any purpose, alleging as follows:
The petitioners are brothers. They along with one Nandagopal Mudaliar constituted a Hindu joint family, which owned and possessed lands in Survey Nos. 205, 207/1, 207/2, 207/3. 207/4 and 208/2 to the total extent of 2.16 acres in Mugappair Village Saidapet Taluk, Chingleput District. The elder brother Nandagopal Mudaliar expired on 17. 1978 and the first petitioner is in management as the kartha of the joint family. They purchased a specific extent of 12 cents in S.No.207/2, one of the items subject matter of the proceedings by means of a registered sale deed on 4. 1963. They got another extent of 12 cents in S.No.207/3 under a registered settlement deed from the legal heirs of one Natesh Mudaliar, their uncle, on 27. 1970. Patta and other revenue records stand in their names. They are paying all land taxes and other public charges relating to those lands from the date of purchases and settlement respectively. They are permanent residents of Mugappair Village and their only avocation is agriculture. In 1963 the first respondent Government initiated land acquisition proceedings and acquired the petitioners’ agricultural lands in S.Nos.59, 517/2, 24/3, 26/1, 27, 28 and 54 measuring an extent of 7.67 acres in Mugappair Village for establishing Ambattur Industrial Estate. In the same year, another land acquisition proceeding for the Korattur Neighbourhood Scheme in the same village was initiated and the petitioner’s lands in S.Nos. 182, 208/1, 86 and 107 measuring a total extent of 4.16 acres were acquired. Thus, the Government had so far acquired 12.28 acres of agricultural lands belonging to the petitioners. They were left only with 2.16 acres in S.Nos.205 etc. already referred to. The petitioners’ family is a big one consisting of 13 members and the entire family depended on the income from the lands. They did not possess any other lands elsewhere.
The first respondent herein issued yet another section 4(1) Notification under the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 29. 1982 passed in G.O.Ms.No. 892, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 9. 1982 including the entire remaining extent in their holding in the aforesaid survey numbers in Mugappair Village stating that the lands were needed for a public purpose, to wit, for the further extension of Ambattur Neighbourhood Scheme . The Notification regarding S.Nos.205, 207/1, 207/4 and 208/4 stands in the name of the petitioners’ eldest brother N.T. Nagappa Mudaliar. Though the petitioners got the lands in S.Nos. 207/2 and 207/3 from the Perundevi Ammal and M. Natesa Mudaliar respectively long before section 4(1) Notification and all the revenue records stand in the names of the petitioners, their names do not find a place in the Notification. Only the names of Perundevi Ammal and Natesa Mudaliar are mentioned. They had nothing to do with lands and they are not interested persons. The revenue records and the patta stand in the joint names of the petitioners and their elder brother late Nandagopal Mudaliar. Still the Notification under section 4(1) gives t
AI
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
