SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1834

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. SUBRAMANIAN, L. VICTORIA GOWRI, JJ.
Thirumani Dharmaraj – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Chennai & Others – Respondents
W.A(MD)No. 989 of 2022 & C.M.P(MD)No. 7976 of 2022
Decided On : 08-06-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:M. Mahaboob Athiff, Advocate. For the Respondents:R. Baskaran, Additional Advocate General assisted by S.P. Maharajan, Special Government Pleader.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'Official Gazette' in the context of land acquisition proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, emphasizing the need for strict compliance with statutory procedures.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 11(1) - Section 3(ee) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - General Clauses Act, 1897 - Rule 13 of the Rules enacted by the Government of Tamil Nadu - District Gazette - Official Gazette - State Gazette - Interpretation of 'Official Gazette' - Compliance with land acquisition procedures

Fact of the Case:

The appellant challenged the land acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, mainly on the ground that publication of the notification in the District Gazette did not comply with the requirements of the said provision.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the term 'Official Gazette' in Section 11(1) of the 2013 Act should be construed to mean the State Gazette and not the District Gazette. It emphasized the need for strict adherence to the land acquisition procedures and ruled that even minor deviations from the established procedure would render the acquisition illegal.

Issues: Interpretation of 'Official Gazette' in the context of land acquisition proceedings under the 2013 Act and the compliance with the statutory requirements for publication of notifications.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of the term 'Official Gazette' in Section 11(1) of the 2013 Act, the legislative intent behind the use of the term, and the need for strict adherence to the land acquisition procedures.

Final Decision: The writ appeal succeeded, and the order of the Writ Court was set aside. The writ petition was allowed, and the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the District Collector were quashed.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P(MD)No.15913 of 2021 dated 05.08.2022.)

R. Subramanian, J.

1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, challenge in which was to the land acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the appellant/writ petitioner is on appeal.

2. An extent of about 5.02.00 hectares of land was sought to be acquired for the purpose of providing a channel for carriage of flood waters from Kannadian Channel by the District Collector of Tuticorin on 08.10.2020 purportedly under Section 11(1) of the 2013 Act. A publication as required under the said Section was also made in Vernacular and English News Papers. The said notification was published in the Tuticorin District Gazette. The appellant submitted his objections. In the entire extent of 5.02.00 hectares of land that was sought to be acquired, 2.52.00 hectares belonged to the appellant. The appellant along with others challenged the said notification issued by the District Collector on 13.10.2020, published in the District Gazette on 08.12.2020, mainly on the ground that publication of the notification under Section 11(1) of the 2013 Act in the District Gazette, would not amount to proper compliance with the requirements of the said provision. Reliance was also placed on Rule 13 of the Rules enacted by the Government of Tamil Nadu under Section 109 of the Act and Sub-section 39 of Section 3 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which defines the term ''''Official Gazette'''' in support of the said contention.

3. The said writ petition was resisted by the respondents contending that the judgment in A.S.Periasamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2004 (2) CTC 406, reliance on which was placed by the appellant herein, would not apply since it was rendered under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and since the definition of the term “appropriate Government” under the said enactment was different from the definition of the term “appropriate Government” under the 2013 Act. Since the term “appropriate Government” has been defined to include the District Collector, according to the respondents, the term “Official Gazette” should also be read as “including the District Gazette”.

4. This contention on the part of the respondents found favour with the Writ Court paving way for this appeal by the appellant. The question that would arise in the case on hand is as to whether the term “Official Gazette” could be read as “including the District Gazette” merely because the District Collector is deemed to be the appropriate Government in certain cases under the 2013 Act. It will be helpful to refer the statutory provisions before we proceed further.

5. Section 3(ee) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, defines “appropriate Government” as follows:

“The expression “appropriate Government” means, in relating to acquisition of land for the purposes of the Union, the Central Government, and, in relation to acquisition of land for any other purposes, the State Government.”

6. Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, requires the preliminary notification to be published in the official gazette. The same reads as follows:

“4. Publication of preliminary notification and powers of officers thereupon.-(1) Whenever it appears to the appropriate Government that land in any locality is needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose or for a company, a notification to that effect shall be published in the Official Gazette and in two daily newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language, and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality (the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice, being hereinafter referred to as th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top