HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. RAJA, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
R. Moorthy Arulappan & Another - Appellantss
Versus
A. Mariammal & Others - Respondents
W.A. No. 2632 of 2022 & C.M.P. No. 21067 of 2022
Decided On : 23-03-2023
Land Acquisition - Tamil Nadu Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act - 1978, Land Acquisition Act - 1894, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act - 2013 - Section 4 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act, 1978, Central Act 1 of 1894, Central Act 30 of 2013
Fact of the Case:
The appellants, owners of certain lands, challenged the acquisition of their lands under the Tamil Nadu Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act, 1978. The court initially held that the Act could not be invoked once the persons were converted to Christianity and the notification was quashed. However, the State authorities were allowed to issue a fresh notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a public purpose. Subsequent proceedings and petitions followed, leading to a direction for the authorities to expedite land acquisition proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the State's decision to acquire the lands for a public purpose was within its rights, and the direction given by the Learned Single Judge based on the State’s own submission was justified. The court also noted that fresh acquisition could be made for distributing the land to the identified beneficiaries. The court dismissed the Writ Appeal, finding no merits in the appeal.
Issues: Validity of land acquisition under the Tamil Nadu Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act, 1978, and subsequent proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Ratio Decidendi: The State's decision to acquire the lands for a public purpose was upheld, and the court found no merits in the appeal. The court also emphasized that fresh acquisition could be made for distributing the land to the identified beneficiaries.
Final Decision: The Writ Appeal was dismissed, and there was no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order dated 10.08.2022 made in W.P.No.6773 of 2022 and allow the above Writ Appeal.)
D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.,
1. The appellants are the owners of the lands in S. Nos. 31/10, 31/14-17 in Thamanur Village, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District admeasuring an extent of Acres 2.15 Cents. By a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Adi-Dravidar Welfare Scheme Act, 1978 dated 28.01.1999, the said lands were sought to be acquired for the purpose of providing free house sites to Adi-Dravidar people, who were converted to Christianity. The petitioners challenged the acquisition before this Court and by order dated 06.01.2009 in W.P. No. 4997 of 1999 it was held that the Act, cannot be invoked once the persons are converted to Christianity and the notification was quashed. However, it was held that the same will not preclude the State authorities to issue fresh notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as it was for a public purpose to provide house sites to poor. This Court also found that the beneficiaries were already in possession and therefore granted an order of status quo regarding possession for a period of twelve weeks, within such time a fresh notification can be issued. The relevant paragraphs 25 and 26 of the Order is extracted hereunder for ready reference:
“25. Therefore, this Court is not inclined only to set aside the acquisition made under Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978 and leave the matters at that. It is just and necessary to give further directions to the second respondent District Collector and the third respondent State of Tamil Nadu. While the acquisition under the Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978 will stand set aside, this will not preclude the respondents from resorting to the acquisition under the Central Act 1 of 1894 for providing house sites to Christian Adidravidars of the Thamanur Village by taking appropriate steps for issuing a proper notification and proceed to acquire the lands for the purpose of distributing them to the 37 beneficiaries already identified by the respondents.
26. The respondents, if so desired, shall take steps to issue notification within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, status quo regarding possession of the land will continue. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
2. However, no steps were taken to acquire the lands, and therefore, Mariammal & 28 others, the original beneficiaries approached this Court to take effective steps under the 1894 Act and issue Pattas to them. By order dated 01.04.2019 in W.P.No.26196 of 2014, this Court recorded the statement made by the official respondents in the counter affidavit that, the Pattas granted to them originally will hold good and disposed off the writ petition. The relevant paragraphs 3 and 4 of the order is extracted hereunder for ready reference:
“3. In the paragraph no. 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent it is stated as follows:
Necessary steps have been taken and in this Office Proc. A/400/98 dated 09.04.1999 pattas to the houseless AdiDravidars (Converted Christians) was issued to 37 beneficiaries in the Tamil Land Acquisition Act 31/78, and the same will hold good, in the Central Act 1/1894, and there is no need to issue fresh pattas. There is no merit in the writ petition and is liable to be dismissed.
4. Recording the aforesaid statement in the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent and in light of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. The petitioners shall workout their remedy before the authority concerned for taking possession of the property.
3. The said Mariammal and others, once again approached this Court by way of W.P. No.19565 of 2020 to mutate the revenue records of the lands in the above survey numbers in their favour. By an order dated 09.07.
AI
The State's power to acquire lands for a public purpose under relevant land acquisition laws and the court's discretion to allow fresh acquisition for distribution to identified beneficiaries.
Acquisition proceedings cannot be nullified for all parties based on individual petitions unless explicitly challenged; procedural fairness is critical.
Point of law: ill-luck could have it on the basis of the present decision of the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the law which was in her favour then has since been reversed and the a....
Once Section 3(1) notification is issued recognizing land owners, and registered deeds and pattas remain unassailed, claimants are entitled to compensation and deposit under Section 10(3) cannot be o....
Subsequent purchasers cannot challenge land acquisition proceedings initiated after the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, as such transactions are void.
The court emphasized that land acquisition must follow due process, and failure to do so renders the acquisition invalid, protecting the property rights of individuals.
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.