High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. MURUGESAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. VENKATARAMAN
The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Nandanam, Chennai & Others
Versus
I .Ravichandran (a) Ravi Sam & Others
W.A.Nos.796 of 2008 & 378 of 2009 M.P.Nos.1 of 2008 & 1 of 2009
Decided on: 16-07-2009
Land Acquisition - Tamil Nadu Housing Board - Land Acquisition Act, 1996 (Act XVI of 1997) - Section 16B, Section 48-B - The court discussed the provisions of Section 16B and Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, and their implications on the entitlement for reconveyance of land. The court emphasized the power of the Government to forfeit land as penalty under Section 16B and the considerations for reconveyance under Section 48-B.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute regarding the reconveyance of land acquired for a housing scheme by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The respondents sought reconveyance of the land, which was rejected by the Government based on the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board Act and the Land Acquisition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Government had the power to forfeit the land as penalty under Section 16B of the Land Acquisition Act and emphasized that the entitlement for reconveyance under Section 48-B was not automatic. The court directed the Government to consider the application for reconveyance in accordance with the legal principles established in previous judgments.
Issues: The issues involved the entitlement for reconveyance of the acquired land and the legal provisions governing the forfeiture and reconveyance under the Land Acquisition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Government had the power to forfeit the land as penalty under Section 16B and emphasized that the entitlement for reconveyance under Section 48-B was subject to the Government's satisfaction and consideration of the application.
Final Decision: The court directed the Government to consider the application for reconveyance under Section 48-B in accordance with established legal principles and previous judgments. The Government was given a period of three months to complete the consideration process.
D. MURUGESAN J.
The Writ appeal in W.A.No. 796 of 2008 is at the instance of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The Writ appeal in W.A.No. 378 of 2009 is at the instance of State. Both the writ appeals question the common order dated 24. 2008 made in the writ petition in W.P.No. 5316 of 2006. By that order the writ petition was allowed by setting aside the impugned orders therein and the Government was directed to exclude the lands in survey numbers in question from the acquisition proceedings and reconvey the same in favour of the petitioners.
2. The controversy in the writ appeals arises under the following circumstances:-
An extent of 43.19 acres of land in S.No.46/2 etc., in Sowripalayam Village, Coimbatore Taluk and District was notified under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for housing scheme. After considering the objection raised in 5A enquiry, a declaration was made and ultimately the acquisition proceedings culminated into one of an award and possession of land was taken over and the same was handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementing the scheme. The respondents earlier approached this court in W.P.No. 6453 of 1991 questioning the acquisition proceedings and the writ petition came to be allowed. However, the appeal preferred at the instance of the State came to be allowed on 12. 1996. Hence, the acquisition proceedings became final. No materials are placed before us that the order in the writ appeal was questioned by way of further appeal. Thereafter, the respondents approached the Government with a request to drop the acquisition proceedings insofar as their lands are concerned. That request was rejected on 14. 2000. It was again questioned by the respondents in W.P.No.8512 of 2000. This court while setting aside the said order remitted back the matter to the Government for fresh consideration. The respondents again approached this court by yet another writ petition in W.P.No.22200 of 2004 seeking for reconveyance of the lands. By order dated 19. 2004, this court again directed the Government to consider their representations made in this behalf. By order dated 18. 2005, the Government rejected the request for reconveyance on the ground that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had informed the Government that the lands would be dealt with in terms of Section 72 of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board Act 1961 and the Tamil Nadu Housing Board did not give any consent for reconveyance. The respondents again made another representation, which was also rejected by the Government on 10. 2005. Both the orders were put in issue before this court and by the order under challenge in the writ appeal the learned Judge after setting aside the impugned orders had allowed the writ petition as stated earlier. Both the State and the Tamil Nadu Housing Board have come up by way of present writ appeals.
3. We have heard Mr.Rajakalifullah, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellant State and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.Veerasekaran, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant Tamil Nadu Housing Board and Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. The questions that arise for our consideration are as follows:-
.(i) Whether in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are entitled for reconveyance of the land especially when the Government had not so far forfeited the lands in exercise of the power conferred under Section 16B of the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act to the Land Acquisition Act and
.(ii) Whether the reasons adduced by the Government in the impugned orders are justifiable ?
5. Point No.1. The Land Acquisition Act (Tamil Nadu Amendment Act ) of 1996 (Act XVI of 1997) was enacted by inserting Sections 16A and Section 16B. By the same Amendment Act Section 48-B was also introduced. Both the provisions read as under:- Section 16-B Land to be forfeited in certain cases-Where the Government are s
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.