A.R.LAKSHMANAN
S. P. Vedanayagam – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department and Others – Respondent
By consent of both parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing.
2. On 21. 1996, I passed the following order after hearing the counsel for the petitioner:
"It is contended by the petitioner that the mandatory requirements contemplated under Sec.4(2) of the Act 31 of 1978 has not been complied with at all and the respondents have straight away proceeded with the publication in the Gazette about the acquisition and issued notice under Sec.5(1) of the Act. The Government Pleader is directed to produce the records before this Court on the adjourned hearing date, in order to verify whether the statement made by the petitioner is correct or false. Past the writ petition for orders on 12. 1996. There will be an interim stay of dispossession till 12. 1996. Notice“.
3. Today, the learned Government Pleader placed the records before this Court and argued the case on the basis of the instructions received by him. Admittedly, the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the Act 31 of 1978 has not been followed. The respondents have treated the notices issued under the provisions of the Central Act as sufficient for the purpose of notice under Sec.4 of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.