Jurisdiction of Civil Court ousted.

This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash a notification of the Government of Madras, dated 22nd January, 1953, under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. The land proposed to be acquired is a vacant site of the extent of about 1 acre and 39 cents situated in the village of Pithapuram. Just to the north of this plot is a market where weekly shandis are held. The market is bounded on the east by a public road and on the north and west by a channel called “The Cherugula kalvai”. If the market is to expand, it can be only on the south. The Maharajah of Pithapuram to whom the site belonged offered it for sale in the year 1945. On 15th August, 1945, the Panchayat Board of Pithapuram passed Resolution No.74 to acquire it from the Maharajah by private sale for the purpose of the market. As the negotiations did not make much of a progress, a further resolution No.53 was passed on 17th June, 1946, requiring the Maharajah to grant the site at a reasonable cost to the Panchayat and by a further resolution No.230, dated 31st January, 1947, the Panchayat Board offered a price of Rs.10,000 for the site. It was at this stage that on 25th March, 1947, the petitioner purchased the site from the Maharajah for a price of Rs.10,200. The Panchayat Board then passed a resolution on 30th September, 1947, requesting the Government to acquire the plot under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner raised objections to the acquisition before the Revenue Officers and after protracted correspondence the Panchayat Board passed finally resolution No.108 on 31st October, 1950, agreeing to the acquisition on the terms mentioned by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Thereafter, a notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 12th December, 1950. The petitioner filed his objections to the acquisition under section 5 of the Act. He also endeavoured to get the Panchayat Board itself to rescind its resolution dated 31st October, 1950, and to withdraw from the acquisition and offered to make a gift of 16 cents to the Panchayat if they would drop the acquisition proceedings. It is stated in the affidavit in support of the petition the resolutions were passed on 20th April, 1951 and 26th May, 1951 cancelling the previous resolution, dated 30th September, 1947, for acquisition of the plot. This, is, however, denied on behalf of the respondents. They state that a requisition was received from the Revenue Divisional Officer informing the Panchayat that the acquisition would be completed during 1951-52 and asking the Panchayat to be ready with the necessary funds and that in reply to this resolution No.6 was passed on 20th April, 1951, stating that the Panchayat Board had already that information; that on 26th May, 1951, when a resolution was moved for reconsidering he matter, it was ruled as out of order and that thereafter the payment of Rs.11.750 by the president towards the cost of the acquisition was ratified by the Panchayat Board by its resolution No.86, dated 31st August, 1951.

After this the petitioner moved the Board of Revenue for withdrawing from the proceedings alleging various irregularities and stating that the site was worth Rs. 45,000 and that there was no need to acquire the same. It is stated in the affidavit of the petitioner that the Inspector of Municipal Councils and Local Boards was asked to report on the necessity for the acquisition of this plot, that he held an enquiry and sent a report that there was no need for the acquisition and that the Panchayat Board was not acting bona fide in attempting to acquire the land. The report however is not among the records. Eventually, the Government considered the entire matter and decided to acquire the site and issued a notification under section 6(1) of the Act on 22nd January, 1953. It is the validity of this notification that is now in question.

Two points have been urged by the p