In both these Writ Petitions, the challenge is to the order of the first respondent dated 26-12-1994 in KP 80/94/KBK, determining the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner as specified in Schedule-II of the Tamil Nadu Occupants of Kudiyiruppu (Conferment of Ownership) Act, 1971 (Tamil Nadu 40 of 1971) and amended Act 39/90 vested in the Kudiyiruppudars.

2. Though initially, the challenge was on the ground that the compensation was not rightly fixed, by W.P.M.P. Nos. 146 and 147 of 2004, the petitioner raised a question of constitutional validity of the provisions contained in Schedule-I of the above said Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that while under the above said Act, the rights of ownership of the land of the petitioner have been done away with, the compensation prescribed under the Schedule-I based on the survey assessment is ‘illusory’ in nature, therefore the said Schedule is liable to be set aside.

4. At the outset, it is required to be stated that the petitioner has not raised any other challenge on any other aspect in these Writ Petitions. In support of the above submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner placed