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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 1678

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, C.Kumarappan, JJ.
Mr.P.Ranganathan and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Industries and ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.27850 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.27402 of 2019
Decided On : 25-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S.M. Loganathan
For the Respondent: Mr. P. Sathish Additional Government Pleader, Mr. Ramesh Venkatachalapathy

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that procedural compliance in land acquisition is crucial, and parties must be given a fair opportunity to present objections to ensure due process.

Headnote:

CERTIORARI - LAND ACQUISITION - The court addressed the challenge to G.O.(Ms).No.120 under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industries Purposes Act, 1997, focusing on procedural compliance and the right to object. The court emphasized the necessity of following statutory procedures and granted the petitioners an opportunity to submit objections, thereby ensuring due process before finalizing the acquisition.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petition was filed challenging G.O.(Ms).No.120, which involved a notification under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industries Purposes Act, 1997. The petitioners contended that they were not afforded an opportunity to submit objections as required by the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that while the respondents claimed compliance with the procedural requirements, the petitioners had not been given a chance to object. The court decided to allow the petitioners to submit their objections within a specified timeframe.

Issues: Whether the procedures mandated by the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industries Purposes Act, 1997 were followed, and whether the petitioners were given a fair opportunity to present their objections.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that adherence to procedural requirements is essential in land acquisition cases to ensure fairness and due process. The opportunity to object is a critical component of the statutory framework.

Result: The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioners to submit their objections within two weeks, which the authorities were to consider before passing an award.

ORDER :

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the entire records in connection with the impugned G.O.(Ms).No.120, Industries (SIPCOT-LA) dated 22.08.2014 of the 1st respondent published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 22.08.2014 and quash the same.

The writ petition has been instituted challenging the G.O.Ms.No.120, Industries (SIPCOT-LA) dated 22.08.2014.

2. It is not in dispute that Section 3(1) Notification under Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industries Purposes Act, 1997 issued on 22.08.2014. The said notification is under challenge in the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the procedures as contemplated under the Act were not followed and no opportunity was afforded to the writ petitioners to submit their objections as required under the Act. Thus, the petitioners have chosen to file the writ petition.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 would oppose by stating that the procedures as contemplated under the Act had been followed. All the adjacent lands were acquired, and compensation quantified was settled in favour of the land owners. The subject land belongs to the petitioners is landlocked now and therefore, they cannot use the land in an independent manner. Further the patta has already been transferred in the name of SIPCOT and the SIPCOT has initiated action to develop industrial parks.

5. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the process of acquisition. However, considering the lapse of time, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the writ petitioners to submit their objections, which is to be considered on merits by the authorities.

6. Accordingly, the writ petitioners are at liberty to submit their objections along with the documents, if any within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of any such objections from the petitioners, the respondents shall consider the same and take a decision and communicate the same to the petitioners and thereafter pass an award under the provisions of the Act. After passing of the award, if the land owners are aggrieved, they are at liberty to file an application seeking enhancement of compensation or otherwise.

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

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