Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE A.K. GANGULY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
Malarkodi & Others
Versus
The Secretary to the Government of Tamilnadu, Adi Dravida and Tribal Welfare Department & Others
W.A.Nos.562 to 564 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.1+1+1 of 2008
Decided on: 14-07-2008
Land Acquisition - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 48-B - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the applicability of Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which allows the government to transfer acquired land back to the original owner under certain conditions. The court also considered the cancellation of assignment pattas under Revenue Standing Orders and the legal principles governing such cancellations.
Fact of the Case:
The case concerned land acquisition proceedings for the purpose of granting free house site pattas to landless Adi Dravidars. The State Government issued an order to re-convey the acquired lands to the original owners and acquire alternative land for the beneficiaries. The beneficiaries challenged this order, arguing that it was not sustainable under Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act and that the cancellation of their assignment pattas was illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order for re-conveyance of the acquired lands was not sustainable under Section 48-B and that the cancellation of assignment pattas was invalid as it violated the principles of natural justice. The court also held that the cancellation order was not communicated to the beneficiaries and was therefore of no effect.
Issues: The issues before the court included the validity of the order for re-conveyance of acquired lands under Section 48-B, the legality of the cancellation of assignment pattas, and the applicability of Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the impugned order for re-conveyance of acquired lands was not sustainable under Section 48-B and that the cancellation of assignment pattas was invalid as it violated the principles of natural justice. The court also found that the cancellation order was not communicated to the beneficiaries and was therefore of no effect.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals, set aside the order of the writ court, and quashed the impugned orders dated 112. 2003 and 14. 2007. The court made no orders as to costs and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions.
A.K. GANGULY, CJ.
1. The appellants are aggrieved against the common order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 30.04.2008, in W.P.Nos.21595, 23587 and 25559 of 2007 and the connected miscellaneous petitions.
2. The issue concerns the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the property situated in Survey Nos.134/2, 137/1A and 137/1B of Pothanur village, Namakkal District. The parties involved are three different groups and for the sake of convenience, the parties are herein after referred to as under:
(i) The appellants in all the three appeals will herein after be referred to as the beneficiaries.
(ii) The respondents 1 to 4 in all the three appeals can be conveniently referred to as acquisition authorities.
(iii) The respondents 5 to 54 in W.A.No.563 of 2008 and the 6th respondent in W.A.564 of 2008 who got themselves impleaded as party respondents by filing separate applications are herein after referred to as rival claimants to the beneficiaries.
3. The beneficiaries preferred the writ petitions challenging G.O.Ms.(3Pa) No.14, dated 12.04.2007, in and by which, the State Government issued directions to the District Collector, Namakkal to re-convey the acquired lands in S.Nos.134/2, 137/1A and 137/1B to an extent of 2.29 acres to the erstwhile land owners and in its place acquire an extent of 4.03 acres in S.Nos.201/2, 201/4 and 154/1A situated in Edayar West and Veernampalayam villages also belonging to the erstwhile land owners for the purpose of issuing free house site pattas to about 180 persons. The impugned G.O. also states that since the compensation amount of Rs.3,17,851/- in respect of the acquired land to the extent of 2.29 acres having already been deposited with the Sub Court, Namakkal and continuing to remain in deposit, there was no need to seek for repayment of the compensation by the erstwhile land owners.
4. The grievance of the beneficiaries who are stated to be 61 in number can be stated as under:
In 1989 proceedings were stated to have been initiated under Section 4(1) and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for acquiring an extent of 2.29 acres in Survey Nos.134/2, 137/1A and 137/1B in Pothanur village, Paramathi Velur Taluk of Namakkal District for the purpose of granting free house site pattas to the land less Adi Dravidars. The acquisition proceedings resulted in Award No.6/92-93 dated 012. 1992. Since the erstwhile land owners objected to the acquisition, the compensation amount of Rs.3,17,851/- was deposited in the Sub Court, Namakkal under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Act on 25.01.1993. The erstwhile land owners preferred W.P.No.9795 of 1991 challenging the acquisition which was dismissed by this Court on 15.06.1999. Pursuant to the dismissal of the writ petition, the acquired lands were taken possession of by the Tahsildar, Paramathi Velur on 112. 1999. Subsequently on 30.04.2003, assignment pattas under the provisions of Board Standing Orders / Revenue Standing Orders came to be issued in favour of the 61 beneficiaries. It is stated that there were complaints apparently at the instance of the rival claimants, who are rival to the beneficiaries, alleging that the assignment pattas granted in their favour should be cancelled.
5. As a sequel to the above referred to complaints, it is stated that the Tahsildar, Paramathi Velur was directed to verify the genuineness of the beneficiaries and based on the enquiry conducted by him in R.O.C. No.7710/2003 dated 20.11.2003, it was reported that most of the beneficiaries were ineligible. Based on the said report, the Acquisition Officer namely the District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer, Nammakkal passed orders in R.O.C.(D1) 35860/99, dated 112. 2003, cancelling all the 61 house site pattas and instructions were also issued to submit the list of revised beneficiaries after holding a fresh enquiry.
6. According to the acquisition authorities, after the issuance of the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
