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 statutory requirements.

ORDER :

(N. Sathish Kumar, J.)

This writ petition mainly challenges the Award passed by the 1st respondent in Roc.No.189/2021/A2, dated 21.04.2022 fixing compensation for the land acquired from the petitioner for the purpose of four lanning of Gopichettipalayam – Chithode (SH-15).

2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition, in brief, are as follows: -

(i) The petitioner is the absolute owner of the agricultural lands measuring an extent of 1.50 Acres comprised in S.No.698/6 of Periyapuliyur Village. The 1st respondent issued a notice on 27.11.2024 under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 [TN Act 34 of 2022] proposing to acquire a portion of land measuring an 364 square meters for four lanning Gopichettipalayam – Chithode (SH-15) out of total extent of Acre 1.50 cents of land owned by the petitioner. The said notification was published in Dinamani Newspaper on 03.12.2014. As the land was sought to be acquired for public purpose for widening of highways, the petitioner did not choose to object the acquisition proceedings and the petitioner was interested in getting compensation for the land acquired from her. The 1st respondent assured a fair compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 [ for short “the RECTLARR Act, 2013”]

(ii) Thereafter, notification under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 10.07.2019 declaring that the land measuring an extent of 441 square meters would be acquired for the intended purpose. The extent of land sought to be acquired was increased from 364 square meters to 441 square meters in the notice issued under Section 15(1) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act.

(iii) No notification under Section 15(2) was issued in respect of 77 square meters of land which was sought to be acquired in addition to 364 square meters for which section 15(2) notification was originally issued. The petitioner made representations on 05.03.2020, 09.09.2020, 14.09.2020 and 21.10.2020 to the respondents objecting to the said illegalities. The respondents informed that compensation would be paid for the entire 441 square meters as per the RECTLARR, 2013.

(iv) Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued a notice dated 25.08.2020 to hold an award enquiry on 09.09.2020 under Section 19(5) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act. The petitioner attended the award enquiry held on 09.09.2020 and produced all the land ownership documents to the 1st respondent and the same were duly acknowledged by the 1st respondent. The petitioner also handed over her representation objecting to the acquisition of 441 square meters of land instead of an extent of 364 square meters for which notification under Section 15(2) was originally issued. The petitioner also produced documents to show that house sites situated behind his land were sold for Rs.1,500 to Rs.2500/- per square feet depending upon the location of plots and requested the 1st respondent to adopt such rate. The market value in the open market is much more than Rs.2,500/- per square feet. However, the materials produced by the petitioner were not at all taken into consideration by the 1st respondent for arriving at the market value as compensation for the acquired land.

(v) The 1st respondent fixed the market value at Rs.1080/- per square the adjoining land (house sites) and whereas for the petitioner's land also house site the 1st respondent fixed the market value only at Rs.694.13 per square meter. The petitioner made several representations, however, without furnishing any document, the 1st respondent transferred a sum of Rs.10,24,371/- to the petitioner's bank account on 29.04.2022. He made a representation on 17.05.2022 pointing out that he was paid compensation based on the lesser market value and whereas the adjacent land owners were paid compensation calculating the market value at Rs.1080 per square meters. He also