Back
2008 Supreme(Mad) 1472
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
S. Rani & Others
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Adi Dravida and Tribal Welfare Department & Others
W.P. No.21595 of 2007 & M.P. No.2 of 2007, W.P. No.23587 of 2007 & M.P.
No.2 of 2007, W.P. No.25559 of 2007 & M.P. No.2 of 2007
Decided on : 30-04-2008
For the Petitioners:V. Raghavachari, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1 to R4, Bhavani Subbarayan, Additional Government Pleader, R5, T. Murugesan, Senior Counsel, R5, A. Tamilvanan, R6, D. Krishnakumar, Advocates.
The court emphasized the principle that possession of land and legal rights are essential for challenging government actions related to land acquisition and exchange.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Adi Dravida Community - Central Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - S. Nos.134/2, 137/1A and 137/1B of Pothanur Village - G.O.Ms (3Pa) No.14, dated 14. 2007
Fact of the Case:
The Writ Petitions sought to quash a government order related to the acquisition of land for assigning house sites to Adi Dravida people. The petitioners claimed possession of the assigned lands and challenged the government order on various grounds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners did not have locus standi to object to the government's action in issuing the impugned order for exchange of land already acquired in lieu of a new site offered for allotment of house sites to Adi Dravida people. The court held that the action taken by the government was legal and in the public interest.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners had the right to challenge the government's order for exchange of acquired land for a new site for house site allotment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that since the petitioners were not in legal possession of the land and their pattas were subsequently cancelled, they could not object to the exchange of land. The court also emphasized the public interest and the need to accommodate more than 120 Adi Dravidars for house sites.
Final Decision: The Writ Petitions were dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
1. By consent of all parties, the Writ Petitions are taken up for final disposal.
2. Prayer in these Writ Petitions is to quash the G.O.Ms (3Pa) No.14, dated 14. 2007.
3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the Writ Petitions are as follows:
a) Petitioners in these Writ Petitions belong to Adi Dravida community and are residing at Vengamedu, Paramathi Velur. The 4th Respondent acquired the property situated in S. Nos.134/2, 137/1A and 137/1B of Pothanur Village in the year 1989 an extent of 2.29 acres for the purpose of assigning house sites to houseless Adi Dravida people. 4th respondent herein passed the Award in No.6/92-93 dated 212. 1992. By proceedings dated 4. 2003, 4th respondent issued assignment of house sites for about 61 persons. Petitioners are among the said 61 persons.
b) The land assigned originally belong to one Ladamani Iyer. The acquisition proceedings were challenged before this Court in W.P. No.9795 of 1991 and the said Writ Petition was dismissed on 16. 1999 and thereafter according to the petitioners, they were given patta on 4. 2003 for two cents each.
c) One S. Balasubramaniam, the legal heir of the original land owner, submitted petition to the respondents requesting to return the lands acquired for exchange of land in S.Nos.201/2, 201/4 and 154/1A, an extent of 4.03 acres. The acquired land is to an extent of 2.29 acres. According to the petitioners the alternate land promised to be exchanged by the said S. Balasubramaniam, 5th respondent in W.P. No.21595 of 2007, is in remote area and not accessible from all places and not within the town of Paramathi Velur.
d) It is also claimed that the petitioners are in possession of their assigned lands from 4. 2003. Some of the petitioners are given electricity power supply by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The Government, through the impugned order, recommended for returning the land acquired to the legal heirs of Ladamani lyer by accepting the proposal of receiving alternate land.
e) According to the petitioners, no notice was served on them even though they are also interested in the said matter. Hence these Writ Petitions are filed challenging the said Government Order dated 14. 2007. The impugned order is also challenged on the ground that withdrawal from acquisition is not permissible, when possession is already taken and handed over to the beneficiaries and further there cannot be any re-conveyance after 18 years.
4. The District Collector, Namakkal, filed common counter affidavit and opposed the Writ Petition contending as follows:
(i) The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Namakkal, initiated the land acquisition proceedings under the Central Land Acquisition Act, 1894, providing free house sites to Arunthadiar and Adi Dravidars of Pothanur Village in respect of properties in S.Nos.134/1 measuring 0.60.5 H; S. No.137/1 A measuring 0.31.5 H; S. No.137/1 B I measuring 0.01.0 H. The land owner raised objections, which were overruled and acquisition proceedings were finalised and at the stage of award enquiry the land owner filed W.P. No.9795 of 1991 and this Court granted interim stay of dispossession.
(ii) The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare completed the acquisition proceedings and passed an award in Award No.6/92-93 on 12. 1992 and compensation amount of Rs.3,17,851/- was deposited in the Sub-Court, Namakkal, under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquired lands were not taken possession as the stay was not vacated. However, the Writ Petition was dismissed on 16. 1999 and thereafter possession was taken through the Tahsildar, Paramathi Velur, under Section 47 of the Land Acquisition Act.
(iii) The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Namakkal submitted a list of beneficiaries to the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Namakkal, who had not approved the beneficiaries list and layout plan and instructed to conduct an enquiry and submit a revised list of beneficiaries with lay
