IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.Raja, S.Sounthar, JJ.
Sri Venkateswara Educational and Charitable Trust - Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Industries SIPCOT (LA) Department and ors. – Respondents
W.A.Nos.1063 and 1223 of 2012 and W.P.Nos.4029, 7093, 7550, 8143, 8144, 8145, 8146, 8147, 8613, 11163, 8992, 11115, 12152, 12873, 15424, 15786, 17363, 19162, 20346, 20525, 21065, 21070, 21071, 21072, 21073, 21074, 22304, 22863, 22864, 22865, 22866, 24062, 24063, 24106, 25821, 25822, 27200, 29433, 31442, 31950, 31952, 33240, 33241, 33242, 35032, 35033, 35034, 35035, 35257, 35259, 35260, 35261, 35263, 35264, 35262, 35258 of 2012 and W.P.Nos.3406, 3543, 3544, 4662, 5222, 5564, 5922, 6592, 7910, 8765, 8766, 8767, 8768, 12300, 12301, 12302, 12303, 13081, 13532, 13533, 13534, 13847, 13848, 13849, 16035, 16036, 16037, 16044, 16045, 16077, 16078 of 2013 and W.P.No.18184 of 2014
Decided On : 17-10-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 –Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 – Section 4(3) – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act 2013 – Writ appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to allow writ appeal by setting aside order – Held, Therefore, court hold that rejection of petitioner's objection by 4th appellant without independent application of mind is bad in law and therefore, notification issued under Section 3 (1), impugned in this writ petition is liable to be quashed – Court therefore, agree with views of learned Single Judge and hence writ appeal stands dismissed – In view of our findings in common question that arose for consideration with regard to determination of base date all other writ petitions are disposed off with direction to respondent/Land Acquisition Officer to pass fresh award by taking as a base date for determination of compensation under Central Act 30 of 2013 after issuing notice to land owners concerned by following procedure in accordance with law – Writ Appeal dismissed.
ORDER :
S.Sounthar, J.
Prayer:This Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of the Letters patent to set aside the order of the learned Judge of this Hon'ble Court, Madras, made in W.P.No.9557 of 2011 dated 24.04.2012.
Prayer: This writ appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order dated 01.02.2012 made in W.P.No.21377 of 2011.
Prayer in W.P.Nos.4029, 7093, 7550, 8143, 8144, 8145, 8146, 8147, 8613, 11163, 8992, 11115, 12152, 15786, 17363, 19162, 20346, 20525, 21065, 21070, 21071, 21072, 21073, 21074, 22304, 22863, 22864, 22865, 22866, 24062, 24063, 24106, 25821, 25822, 27200, 29433, 31442, 31950, 31952, 33240, 33241, 33242, 35032, 35034, 35035, 35257, 35259, 35260, 35261, 35263, 35264, 35262, 35258 of 2012 and W.P.Nos.3406, 3543, 3544, 4662, 5222, 5564, 5922, 6592, 7910, 8765, 8766, 8767, 8768, 12300, 12301, 12302, 12303, 13081, 13532, 13533, 13534, 13847, 13848, 13849, 16035, 16036, 16037, 16044, 16045, 16077, 16078 of 2013: These writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the record of the first respondent in No.II(2)/IND/467(e- 4)/2011 in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette in the extraordinary issue published on November 29th 2011 and the communication of the second respondent No.RC.No.10/2010 dated 20.01.2012 respectively without following the due process of law as void ab initio and quash the same.
Prayer: This writ petition has been filed under Articel 226 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to G.O.Ms.No.59, Industries (Sipcot-LA) issued by the first respondent and published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 02.03.2012 quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to consider the respresentation dated 09.04.2012 and delete the petitioner's land situated at Survey No.22 of 2A1 Vallam Village, 124 Sriperumbudur.
Prayer: This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified Mandamus to call for records of the 1st respondent in his R.C.No.45 of 2010 a Unit V dated 05.05.2012 and quash the same and pass a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent not to exercise the power under Section 4(3) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 of the petitioner's land in S.No.267/1 to 5 and 268/3.
Prayer: This writ petition has been filed under Section 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the Acquisition Notification in G.O.M.S.No.113, Industries (SIPCOT-LA) 04-06-2012, on the file of the 1st respondent issued under Sub- Section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for industrial Purposes Act, 1997, published in the Tamilnadu Government Gazette Extraordinary No.149-Part-II-Section 2 dated 04-06.2012 relating to the property schedule therein and in so far as the petitioner property is concerned, being the housing site in Plot No.994, Comprised in Survey No.315/2A measuring to an extent of 2400 square feet in Mathur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to conduct personal hearing to the petitioner as per the representation dated 12.02.2010 by furnishing the report of the respondents 3 and 4.
Prayer: This writ petition has been filed under Article 266 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 1st respondent contained in G.O.Ms.No.113, Industries (SIPCOT-LA) dated 04.06.2012 and to quash the same as it is arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional exercise of power insofar as it applies to the petitioner's land and consequently direct the respondents not to acquire the lands at Plot No.1010, comprised in Survey Nos.315/2, 316 situated at No.180, Mathur Village, Sriperambudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District from the petitioner herein.
Aligarh Development Authority versus Megh Singh and others
Caritas India vs. Union of India and Others 2019 (4) CTC 737
Narain Das Jain (since deceased) by Lrs. v. Agra Nagar Mahapalika, Agra
Tukaram Kana Joshi & Ors. v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & Ors.
The government is not bound by prior negotiations unless formalized, retaining authority to determine compensation under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act.
The court emphasized that failure to follow mandatory procedures in land acquisition invalidates the award, highlighting the necessity of proper notifications and consideration of market value as per....
The court affirmed that compensation for land acquisition must be based on legally established values, ensuring equity, and mandated interest payment from the date of possession, adhering to statutor....
Where land acquisition for public purposes remains unfinished and possession is not taken, compensation must be determined in accordance with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land A....
Acquisition of land for transport infrastructure is valid under the industrial purpose definition, and there is no statutory time limit for passing awards under Tamil Nadu Acquisition Act.
Compensation for land acquisition must be determined based on market value at the time of notification, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions and fair procedures.
The right to property under Article 300A must be upheld through due legal processes; unlawful dispossession by state authorities mandates compensation per statutory requirements.
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.