Common Order:

Inasmuch as the issue involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, a common order is being passed.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. It has been stated that late N.S.Ramaswami, brother of the petitioner, was the owner of the vacant land in Thiruvanmiyur Revenue Village, Chennai, in S.No.214/2, measuring 5 grounds and 498 Sq.Ft. The Government of Tamilnadu had acquired 2 grounds and 2298 Sq.Ft., 650 Sq.Mts. or 7080 Sq.Ft., under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978. As he was a bachelor, he was allowed to retain 2 grounds and 600 sq.ft. He had died, on 22. 87, and thereafter, the petitioner had succeeded to his estate, as his sole legal heir.

4. It has been stated that the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, had been repealed by the State Government by the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999. Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, provides for restoration of the lands to the original owner, if actual possession had not been taken over by the Government, after taking back the amount paid as compensation. According to Section 11(5) and 11(6) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, taking over of possession of the lands from the land owners should be physical possession and mere vesting of right in the Government will not give any right to the respondents to retain the lands in question. At no point of time, after the lands were acquired by the State Government, physical possession had been taken over, either by the State Government or by any officer or authority authorised on its behalf.

5. Even if the land could be said to have vested in the Government, under Section 11 (3), it does not mean that physical possession had been taken over. As per the order in Rc.No.5767/85, dated 31. 85, of the Assistant Commissioner, a sum of Rs.12,101.75/-, had been fixed as compensation for the lands said to have been acquired by the State Government. The petitioner and her late brother, N.S.Ramaswami, did not receive the entire amount of compensation. The last payment of Rs.1151/-had been received by the petitioner, vide Letter No.Na.Ka.A2/027/96, dated 212. 96, received from the Assistant Commissioner, Mylapore, the fourth respondent herein.

6. From the records available with the petitioner, it is seen that the said amount represents the 11th and 12th instalments. Even though the fourth respondent had not mentioned the number of instalments covered by the Payment of the said amount, in view of Section 3 of the Tamilnadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, the lands in question, said to have been acquired by the State Government, would continue to vest in the petitioner, since physical possession had not been taken over by the respondents.

7. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the allegations made by the petitioner, in his affidavit, filed in support of the writ petition, have been denied. It has been stated that the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, came into force in the urban agglomerations of the State of Tamil Nadu, on 8. 76. N.S.Ramaswami, the brother of the petitioner had owned 1161 Sq.Mts. of land in S.No.214/2 of Thiruvanmiyur Village, having purchased the same, as per Document No.2125/1961, dated 161. He had filed the return, under Section 6(1) of the said Act, on 276. He had applied for exemption, under Section 21(1) (b) of the Act. However, it was rejected by a Government Letter No.685-A/T2/77-6, dated 177.

8. As the land owner was a bachelor, he was entitled to hold 500 Sq.mts. of vacant land. Therefore, the competent authority, Alandur, had computed 661 Sq.Mts. as excess vacant land and he had issued a draft statement, under Section 9(1), with notice, under