IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND K.RAJASEKAR, JJ.
The Chairman Tamil Nadu Housing Board – Appellant
versus
V.K.Sambantham - Respondent
W.A.Nos.1142, 1088, 1135, 1086 of 2025
Decided on : 23-04-2025
(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4(1) - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24(2) - Land acquisition proceedings initiated in 1998 for developing Tirumazhisai Neighbourhood Scheme - Writ petitions challenging S.4(1) notification were allowed, leading to appeals by Tamil Nadu Housing Board - Government dropped acquisition for lands without awards, retaining only those with awards passed - Court found that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had taken possession and developed the land, thus the writ Court erred in allowing the petitions. (Paras 2, 3, 5, 11, 13)
(B) Re-conveyance of land under Section 48-B of the old LA Act - The court ruled that re-conveyance cannot be claimed as an absolute right once the land is vested with the Government and awards have been passed. (Paras 7, 11)
(C) Equality clause under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution - The court held that the equality clause does not apply to cases where awards have been passed versus those where they have not. (Paras 8, 12)
Facts of the case:
The appeals arose from the writ petitions challenging the S.4(1) notification for land acquisition in five villages for a housing scheme, where awards had been passed for 466.49 acres, and the Government decided to drop acquisition for lands without awards.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had taken possession of the land and was developing the Tirumazhisai Satellite Township, thus the writ petitions were improperly allowed.
Issues: The main issues included the validity of the S.4(1) notification, the applicability of the equality clause, and the conditions for re-conveyance under the old LA Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that once land is acquired and awards passed, re-conveyance cannot be claimed as an absolute right, and the equality clause does not apply to unequal cases.
Result: Writ appeals allowed.
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.)
The intra-Court appeals on hand have been instituted under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, challenging the order passed by the writ Court dated 18.11.2021 in the respective writ petitions.
2. The facts in brief required for consideration would be that the land acquisition proceedings in five villages, namely, Koothambakkam, Vellavedu, Parvatharajapuram, Narasingapuram and Chembarambakkam villages were initiated by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the old LA Act”) in the year 1998, pursuant to the announcement made by the Hon'ble Minister for Housing and Urban Development on the floor of the Assembly on 21.08.1996, for developing Tirumazhisai Neighbourhood Scheme through the requisitioning body, Tamil Nadu Housing Board. Acquisition proceedings were initiated to acquire 1694.98 acres, which includes 743.35 acres of wet lands and 951.63 acres of dry lands. S.4(1) notification was issued. Admittedly, awards have been passed in respect of 466.49 acres, which includes 371.59 acres of wet lands and 94.90 acres of dry lands. In respect of lands acquired after passing of awards, the Government passed an order and handed over the acquired lands to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. Challenging S.4(1) notification, writ petitions were filed by the owners. The batch of writ petitions filed challenging S.4(1) notification were allowed and aggrieved thereby, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) preferred writ appeals before this Court. The writ appeals filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board were dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide the common judgment dated 19.10.2023. Special Leave Petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board was dismissed at the admission stage.
3. Fact remains that the Government itself came out with a revised proposal and had taken a decision to drop the acquisition proceedings in respect of cases where no award has been passed. Accordingly, lands to an extent of 1228.49 acres were exempted from land acquisition proceedings, mainly on the ground that no award has been passed in those cases. The Government considered the revised proposal of the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board for formation of Tirumazhisai Satellite Township and decided not to acquire lands any further, except 235.67 acres of lands, for which awards have been passed and possession handed over to Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 33.42 acres for which possession yet to be handed over to Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 102.50 acres covered under Court cases, for which award has already been passed. Altogether 371.59 acres of wet lands and 94.90 acres of dry lands, for which award has been passed and possession yet to be handed over and 12.96 acres of wet lands for formation of approach road. Entire land is totally 466.49 acres.
4. As far as the present batch of writ appeals are concerned, the acquisition involved is to an extent of 83.29 acres. It is not in dispute between the parties that award had been passed in all those cases and compensation had been deposited either in civil Court deposit or in district treasury and in some of the cases, the erstwhile land owners withdrew the award amount. Therefore, out of 466.49 acres of lands, wherein award has been admittedly passed, 83.29 acres of lands including the lands covered in two writ petitions have been involved in respect of the batch of writ appeals now before this Court.
5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board would mainly contend that the lands involved in the present batch of writ appeals measuring 83.29 acres are concerned, admittedly award has been passed and compensation has been deposited by the Government and the Tamil Nadu Housing Board being the requisitioning body has taken possession. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board has already developed Tirumazhisai Satellite Township under the very same sche
The court ruled that once land acquisition awards are passed, re-conveyance cannot be claimed as an absolute right, and the equality clause does not apply to cases with differing acquisition statuses....
An award under the Land Acquisition Act legally vests land with the Government, barring re-conveyance claims and differentiating between awarded and unawarded lands regarding exemption under Section ....
The court confirmed that land acquisition proceedings, once awards are passed and compensation deposited, are valid under the applicable laws, rejecting claims based on broader exemption decisions.
Re-conveyance of acquired land is discretionary under Section 48-B, and cannot be claimed as an absolute right by landowners.
Subsequent purchasers cannot challenge land acquisition proceedings initiated after the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, as such transactions are void.
The legal principle established is that the government retains ownership and utilization rights over land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, and former owners cannot claim reconveyance after co....
Subsequent purchasers of land acquired under the 1894 Act cannot claim rights under the 2013 Act as their transactions are void.
The court upheld that stale claims related to land acquisition cannot be revisited, emphasizing that subsequent purchasers cannot contest valid acquisitions based on possession, which amounts to encr....
Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement act, 2013 does not confer a new cause of action to challenge concluded acquisition p....
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.