The court affirmed that procedural non-compliance does not invalidate acquisition proceedings unless it causes prejudice, and jurisdiction must be established for issuing notifications under the Tamil Nadu Highways Act.

ORDER :

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to the acquisition notification issued by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings dated Na.Ka.No. 155/2023/SH-1 dated 24.07.2024 issued under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 and quash the same as illegal.

1. The Writ petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the acquisition notification issued by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings dated Na.Ka.No. 155/2023/S.H-1 dated 24.07.2024 issued under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001.

2. The petitioner’s case is as follows:

2.1. The petitioner is a reputed college in the southern District of Tamil Nadu and has been in existence for over 130 years. The college was established in the year 1881 by the Christian Minority Missionaries (called the American Mission) in the same year, when the prestigious St. Stephen College, New Delhi was established. The building of the college which is constructed in an Anglo Saxon style is a heritage building. The college is an autonomous college and offers 47 under graduate courses, 21 post graduate courses and 9 Research Departments. In and around 12000 students are pursuing their education in various courses in the petitioner college.

2.2. The college is situate right in the heart of the Madurai city and the campus is about 45 acres. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would indicate that earlier on 15.02.2018, a notification under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) was issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai expressing an intent to put up a fly over bridge, for which purpose the land of the petitioner comprised in T.S. Nos. 10, 14, 15, 16 and 1 were sought to be acquired. Since the notification has been issued by an authority who did not have jurisdiction, the petitioner had moved W.P. (MD) Nos. 6062 to 6268 of 2018 questioning the acquisition. The grievance of the petitioner on jurisdiction was that it was only the State Government that was competent to issue a notice under Section 15(2) of the Act. After the filing of the writ petitions, the notification under Section 15(2) was withdrawn the therefore by recording the same the Writs were dismissed by orders of Court dated 04.04.2018. The Court did not grant liberty to the respondents to issue a fresh notice.

2.3. However, on 17.04.2018 yet another notification under Section 15(2) of the Act was issued. Once again, the writ petitioner has challenged the said notice in W.P. (MD) Nos. 12847 to 12853 of 2018 by contending that in the earlier writ petition no liberty was obtained and therefore the notification issued without liberty has to be quashed. That apart, the petitioner had also contended that the public notice issued under Section 15(2) and the private notice issued under the same section had been issued by different authorities. By orders of Court dated 13.12.2018, the notification came to be quashed.

2.4. Thereafter, the District Revenue Officer issued a notification dated 13.11.2021 under Section 15(2) of the Act, once again expressing the intent to acquire the lands of the petitioner for constructing a fly over bridge. The petitioner had once again challenged the same by filing W.P. (MD) No. 22409 of 2021 by contending that the authority who issued the notification did not have the jurisdiction and the provisions of Section 8 Rule 5 of the Act have not been followed. However, by an order dated 21.12.2021 the writ petition was dismissed as premature and liberty was given to the petitioner to raise necessary objections to the notification and the respondents therein were directed to consider the same.

2.5. Thereafter, on 25.02.2022, a notification under Section 15(1) of the Act was issued stating that t