High Court of Judicature at Madras
JAGADEESAN
P. Venkatesan & Others
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Dept. & Another
W.P. No. 5806 of 1999
Decided On :Decided On : 20-07-1999
Award Nullity - Land Acquisition Act - The court declared the award null and void as the Collector did not obtain the previous approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue as required under proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the validity of an award on the grounds that the Collector did not obtain the prior approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue as required by the Land Acquisition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the award was null and void due to the failure to obtain the required approval, as mandated by the Land Acquisition Act.
Issues: The main issue was whether the award was valid without the prior approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue as required by the Land Acquisition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act mandates the prior approval of the appropriate authority, and the failure to comply with this requirement renders the award null and void.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the award was declared null and void.
The petitioners have filed this writ petition for declaration to declare that the Award No. 20/94 in R.C. No. 1607/90 dated 2.9.94 on the file of the second respondent is ab initio void.
2. Since the validity of the award is being challenged on legal ground. I do not think there is any need to elaborate the facts. The short ground on which the learned Senior Counsel Mr. Doraisamy impugned the award is that the total compensation amount awarded by way of the value of the land is Rs. 14,29,073/- and the Collector ought to have got the prior approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue, as required under proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. As that has not been done, the award is null and void.
3. Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act requires that the award shall be made by the Collector only with the previous approval of the appropriate Government or of such officer as the appropriate Government may authorise in this behalf. The wordings of the proviso is in the negative form which is as follows:
“Provided that no award shall be made by the Collector under this sub-section without the previous approval of the appropriate Government or of such officer as the appropriate Government may authorise in this behalf.”
4. The Commissioner of Land Revenue has been specified as the appropriate authority to approve the award of the Collector. In cases where the total compensation exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs under G.O.Ms. No. 2003 Revenue Department dated 13.12.1984. The appendix to the said G.O. is as follows:
“Under the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 (Central Act 1 of 1984). as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Central Act 68 of 1984). the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby authorises. —
(i) The Commissioner of Land Administration, to approve every award in which the total Compensation to be allowed exceeds ten lakhs rupees, and
(ii) The District Collector to approve every award in which the total Compensation to be allowed does not exceed ten lakhs rupees.”
5. The said G.O. was amended by G.O.Ms. No. 1027 Revenue Department dated 25.9.92 by enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 20 lakhs for the approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue.
6. Within a short time, by letter dated No86973/C.Spl.1/92-1, dated 4.11.1992 the Government had suspended the operation of the said G.O.Ms. No. 1027 Revenue Department dated 25.9.92 and directed the Collectors to maintain ‘ status quo ante ’ and to continue to send the proposals for approval of valuation and approval of award statements to the Commissioner of Land Administration.
7. Hence on the date when the award was passed, it is absolutely necessary that the Collector ought to have got the prior approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue. In this case, admittedly, the Collector has not obtained the previous approval of the said Commissioner of Land Revenue. Only subsequent to the passing of the award, the Collector has written for the approval for which the Commissioner of Land Revenue has sent a reply on 18.12.95 stating that the Collector ought to have sought for the previous approval of the Commissioner of Land Revenue before even the award was passed. There is no provision in the Act to ratify the award passed by the Collector.
8. It is worthwhile to extract the reply of the Commissioner for Land Revenue which is as follows: Tamil
9. Hence the award is not a valid one and virtually it is a nullity since the same had not been passed in accordance with proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. When the Act provides the procedure to do a thing, that must be done in the manner in which the Act requires. Since that has not been done, the award is null and void.
10. In this case, the proviso to Section 11 (1) makes it clear that no award shall be made by the Collector without the previous approval of the appropriate Go
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.