IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.P. SAHI, SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, JJ.
Ravisam - Appellant
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department & Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 3887 of 2019
Decided On : 22-07-2020
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 6 – Appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned Single Judge delivering a common judgment in two writ petitions, one of which W.P. was filed by the appellant challenging the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with a prayer to quash notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the said Act, whereby land measuring 3.03 Acres of SF. in Vilankurichi Village, Coimbatore North Taluk, has been acquired – This appeal is, therefore, confined only in relation to the said land that concerns the appellant, who was the writ petitioner –Held, In the light of what has been deliberated by us, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Single Judge did not examine any of these factual or legal issues and now with the disclosure of certain facts that have been placed before us, we find it expedient, and in the interest of justice, that the same should be allowed to be contested before the learned Single Judge with appropriate pleadings being placed on record – Learned single Judge, while dismissing the Writ Petition does not appear to have appreciated the aforesaid principles and non-adherence thereto vitiates the impugned judgment – Further, the respondents were also not diligent in even filing a counter-affidavit before the learned single Judge which factor has also been overlooked in the impugned judgment – Approach adopted by us is in order to uphold the principles underlying the exercise of writ jurisdiction, which go to the extent of obliging us to prevent any miscarriage of justice – Learned counsel appearing for all the parties agree that in the light of the above, the matter deserves to be remitted back to the learned single Judge – Accordingly, with their consent, we are proceeding to dispose of this Appeal – Dispose of this Appeal.
JUDGMENT
A.P. SAHI, J.
PRAYER: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 24.6.2019 in W.P.No.3640 of 2001.
The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 24.6.2019 of the learned Single Judge delivering a common judgment in two writ petitions, one of which W.P.No.3640 of 2001 was filed by the appellant challenging the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, “the 1894 Act”) with a prayer to quash notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the said Act, whereby land measuring 3.03 Acres of SF.Nos.411/1 and 411/2 in Vilankurichi Village, Coimbatore North Taluk, has been acquired. This appeal is, therefore, confined only in relation to the said land that concerns the appellant, who was the writ petitioner in W.P.No.3640 of 2001.
2. The land has been acquired for a Housing Scheme, namely, Ganapathy Neighbourhood Scheme Phase 2 in Coimbatore. The notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, that was published in the gazette is dated 20.3.1991, and was also subsequently published in the newspapers as well as in the locality, the dates whereof are different. The notification dated 26.5.1992 under Section 6 of the 1894 Act was published in the official gazette on 28.5.1992. The schedule appended to the said declaration in relation to the plots in question are relevant, keeping in view the nature of the controversy raised by the appellant. In the Section 4 gazette notification, the following description is given with regard to the survey numbers, which includes Plot Nos.411/1 and 411/2:
“Coimbatore District, Coimbatore North Taluk No.13,
Vilanchurichi Village
(The extent given is approximate)
Government, dry, S.F.No.410-1, belonging to P.S.G. Ganga Naidu and Sons Trust and Krishna Naidu, bounded on the north by S.F.No.404, east by S.F.No.410-2, south by S.F.Nos.411-1 and 411-2 and west by S.F.No.413 – 2.79.0 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.410-2, belonging to Narayanasamy Naidu, Raju Naidu and Balakrishnan, bounded on the north by S.F.No.404, east by S.F.No.409, south by S.F.No.411-2 and west by S.F.No.410-1 – 0.81.0 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.411-1, belonging to same as in S.F.No.410-1, bounded on the north by S.F.No.410-1, east by S.F.No.411-2, south by S.F.No.442 and west by S.F.Nos.412 and 413 – 1.68.0 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.411-2, belonging to same as in S.F.No.410-2, bounded on the north by S.F.Nos.410-1 and 410-2, east by S.F.No.407-1, south by S.F.No.442 and west by S.F.No.411-1 – 2.03.5 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.412, belonging to Narayana Naicker, and Subba Naicker, bounded on the north by S.F.No.413 and 415, east by S.F.Nos.411-1 and 442, south by S.F.Nos.441-1 and 441-2A and west by S.F.No.416 – 2.87.0 hectares.
Total – 10.18.5 hectares.
L.K. TRIPATHY
Secretary to Government”
3. The same description indicating the names in detail were again repeated in the notification under Section 6 of the 1894 Act, which is extracted herein under:
“SCHEDULE
Coimbatore District, Coimbatore North Taluk No.13,
Vilanchurichi Village
Government, dry, S.F.No.410-1, belonging to P.S.G. Ganga Naidu and Sons Trust and Krishna Naidu, bounded on the north by S.F.No.404, east by S.F.No.410-2, south by S.F.Nos.411-1 and 411-2 and west by S.F.No.413 – 2.79.0 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.410-2, belonging to Narayanasamy Naidu, Raju Naidu and Balakrishnan, bounded on the north by S.F.No.404, east by S.F.No.409, south by S.F.No.411-2 and west by S.F.No.410-1 – 0.81.0 hectares.
Government, dry, S.F.No.411-1, belonging to P.S.G. Ganga Naidu and Sons Trust and Krishna Naidu, bounded on the north by S.F.No.404-1, east by S.F.No.411-2, south by S.F.Nos.442 and west by S.F.Nos.412 and 413 – 165.0 hectare.
Government, dry, S.F.No.411-2, belonging to Narayanasamy Naidu, Raju Nadu and Balakrishnan, bounded on the north by S.F.Nos.410-1 and 410-2, east by S.F.No.407-1, south by S.F.No.442
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Darius Shapur Chennai and others
Patasi Devi v. State of Haryana and others
Banda Development Authority v. Motilal Agarwal and others
Raghbir Singh Sehrawat v. State of Haryana and others
Executive Engineer and others v. Girija Janarthanan and others
Satendra Prasad Jain v. State of U.P.
G.S. Gopalakrishnan and others v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others
Province of Bombay v. Khushaldas S. Advani and Others
Veerappa Pillai v. Raman & Raman Ltd. and Others
Election Commission, India v. Saka Venkata Subba Rao And Others
T.C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa and Others
Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Syed Ahmad Ishaque And Others
Syed Yakoob v. K.S. Radhakrishnan And Others
Nanha and Others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Kanpur and Others
P.C. Thanikavelu v. The Special Deputy Collector for Land Acquisition, Madras and others
Asiya Mariyan v. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu
V. Devaraj and others v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others
Savithiriammal v. The State of Tamil Nadu and another
Goundathal and others v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others
Leelavathi v. The State of Tamil Nadu
J. Doraibabu and another v. State of Tamil Nadu and others
May George v. Special Tahsildar And Others
J&K Housing Board And Another v. Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Kaul And Others
SupremeToday
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.