The judgment establishes the mandatory nature of the notice under Section 11(5) and the requirement for actual take over of possession under Section 11(6) under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978.

D. Hariparanthaman, J.

The writ petition is preferred by the land owners against the order dated 011. 2000 passed in T.R.P.No.187 of 1999 by the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Special Appellate Tribunal, confirming the order dated 210. 1989 of the Competent Authority, the third respondent herein, under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the order dated 07.09.1990 of the Appellate Authority, the second respondent herein.

2. Tmt.Kalpana Krishnamoorthy owned urban land in Kottivakkam. She is the wife of the first petitioner and mother of the petitioners 2 to 5. She did not file the return under Section 7(1) of the Act. Hence, a notice dated 17.05.1982 under Section 7(2) was issued to her by the third respondent, the Competent Authority, seeking her to file return.

3. Thereafter, a draft statement under Section 9(1) was prepared by the Competent Authority regarding the vacant land held by the land owner in excess of ceiling limit and the same was served under Section 9(4) of the Act indicating that she was in possession of 6700 Sq.mts land in excess of the ceiling limit, after permitting her to retain 500 Sq.mts. She was asked to make her objections within 30 days.

4. The first petitioner sent an objection dated 19.09.1988 stating that Tmt.Kalpana Krishnamoorthy is his wife and she died on 26.01.1987 leaving him and the petitioners 2 to 5 as legal heirs and contended that the concerned land is agricultural land and therefore, those lands could not be acquired under the Act.

5. An order dated 210. 1989 was issued under Section 9(5) of the Act by the Competent Authority, the third respondent herein, considering the objections made to 9 (1) draft statement. As per the order, 2000 Sq.mts. was allowed to the land owners for retention and the extent of land in excess of ceiling limit was determined as 5250 Sq.mts.

6. Thereafter, as mentioned in the aforesaid order dated 210. 1989 under Section 9(5) of the Act, the Competent Authority, the third respondent herein determined the surplus land as 5250 Sq.mts under Section 10(1) of the Act and a final statement in Form III prescribed under Rule 8 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) was issued. The same was served on the first petitioner, showing the surplus land as 5250 Sq.mts.

7. After the service of the final statement in Form III under Section 10(1) of the Act, the Competent Authority issued a notification under Section 11(1) in Form V calling for claims from all persons interested in the vacant land. The said notification under Section 11(1) was issued in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 30.05.1990.

8. After issuing notification under Section 11(1) of the Act calling for any claims from the interested persons over the surplus land, the Competent Authority issued a notification under Section 11(3) of the Act. The said notification was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 25.07.1990 and as per the notification, a declaration was made that the land shall be deem to have vested with the Government with effect from 25.08.1990.

9. The petitioners filed appeal to the second respondent under Section 33 of the Act.

10. The second respondent passed an order dated 07.09.1990 dismissing the appeal and held that the order under Section 9(5) of the Act was served on the petitioners on 012. 1989 and the petitioners filed appeal on 11.01.1990 and hence there was a delay of 4 days. The appeal was thus dismissed on the ground of delay in preferring the appeal belatedly by four days.

11.Therefore, the petitioners filed writ petition in W.P.No.12892 of 1991 to quash the order dated 210. 1989 of the third respondent and 07.09.1990 of the second respondent and for consequent direction to the respondents to drop all further proceedings. On constitution of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Special Appellate Tribunal, the writ petition was transferre