JUDGMENT :

V.M. VELUMANI, J.

Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 23.12.2014 made in W.P. No. 2423 of 2011 passed by this Court.

1. The appellant-Tamil Nadu Housing Board has filed the present appeal challenging the order of this Court dated 23.12.2014 made in W.P. No. 2423 of 2011.

2. The 1st respondent herein filed W.P. No. 2423 of 2011 challenging the Land Acquisition Proceedings to acquire his land in Survey No. 536/2 to an extent of 0.98.0 Hectares. The 2nd respondent issued Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for acquiring the larger extent of land including the land of the 1st respondent for developing the neighbourhood scheme. The 3rd respondent was appointed as Land Acquisition Officer. According to 1st respondent, Section 4(1) Notification was issued on 06.09.1996 and Section 6 Declaration was notified only on 28.10.1997, beyond one year. His further case is no notice was issued to him at any point of time, he was not called for filing his objection and not called for enquiry. The award ought to have been passed on or before 27.10.1999. The award dated 29.10.1999 was passed beyond the period of one year, after lapse of time limit fixed in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents 1 and 2 did not take possession from the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent is still in possession and is cultivating the land. The 1st respondent produced Patta, Adangal to show that he was cultivating the land. After coming into force the New Land Acquisition Act, 2013, the 1st respondent raised additional grounds that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the old Act lapsed as the respondents 1 and 2 failed to comply with conditions imposed. According to 1st respondent, he was in possession and the respondents 1 and 2 did not take possession and did not pay any compensation to him. His further case is he was not aware of the land acquisition proceedings and he came to know about the said proceedings only on 11.01.2011, when the officials of the 2nd respondent visited the 1st respondent's land and only on verification, he came to know about the land acquisition proceedings. On the application filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the 2nd respondent informed the 1st respondent that there is no record in their Office to show that land was taken possession from the 1st respondent, details of compensation and handing over possession to the appellant. On these grounds, the 1st respondent prayed for allowing the Writ Petition:

(a) The respondents 2 and 3 contended that the respondents followed the procedure for acquiring the land and award was passed as contemplated by the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and compensation was paid to the 1st respondent through cheque. The possession was taken over from him and handed over the possession to the appellant.

3. The learned Judge considering the materials placed, by the order dated 23.12.2014, allowed the Writ Petition holding that land acquisition proceedings lapsed and discharged the land of the 1st respondent from land acquisition proceedings.

4. Challenging the said order dated 23.12.2014 made in W.P. No. 2423 of 2011, the appellant-Tamil Nadu Housing Board has come out with the present appeal.

5. Pending Writ Appeal, the 1st respondent died and his legal heirs were impleaded as respondents 4 to 6 as per the order of this Court dated 27.04.2021 made in C.M.P. No. 18163 of 2018 in W.A. No. 1628 of 2017.

6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the 3rd respondent followed the procedure and passed the award. The compensation was paid to the notified persons, possession was handed over to the appellant on 08.12.1999. In view of the above fact, Section 24(2) of the new Act is not applicable to the present case. The delay in initiating neighbourhood scheme will not give any right to the land owner:

(a) The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant further submitt