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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3689

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, J.
Balakrishnan S/o.Annamalai - Petitioner
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.5384 of 2025
Decided On : 19-02-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.A.Ilaya Perumal
For the Respondent: Mr.A.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader

Once acquisition proceedings are quashed, the authority cannot claim rights over the land, and administrative bodies must adhere to prior court rulings.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4(1) - Writ of Mandamus - Issuance of patta for land - Petitioner sought patta for land previously acquired by Housing Board, which was quashed by court - Tahsildar's insistence on NOC from Housing Board deemed unwarranted - Court directed issuance of patta without NOC. (Paras 1-11)

(B) Legal Principle - Once acquisition proceedings are quashed, the authority cannot claim rights over the land - Previous court orders must be adhered to by administrative authorities. (Paras 5-10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, claiming ownership of land, sought patta but was denied due to the requirement of an NOC from the Housing Board, despite previous court rulings quashing the acquisition.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Housing Board had no rights over the land post-quashing of the acquisition notifications and directed the Tahsildar to issue patta without requiring an NOC.

Issues: The main issue was whether the Tahsildar could insist on an NOC from the Housing Board after the acquisition had been quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the insistence on an NOC was unwarranted as the Housing Board had lost its rights over the land following the quashing of the acquisition notifications.

Result: Writ petition allowed.

ORDER :

N. Anand Venkatesh, J.

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the fifth respondent to issue patta to the petitioner for his land measuring 1326 sq.ft., Plot No.23 situated at Muniyappa Nagar in Old S.No.123, New S.No.123/7 of Nerkundaram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Chennai District, by considering the representation dated 17.10.2024.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the subject property and he is in possession and enjoyment of the same, right from the day on which he purchased the property. The petitioner had applied for patta before the fifth respondent, namely, the Tahsildar and the Tahsildar was insisting for getting an NOC from the Housing Board. Aggrieved by the same the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

3. A similar batch of writ petitions came to be filed before this Court and this Court passed an order dated 04.09.2017 made in WP.No.17484 to 17492 of 2017. For better understanding, the order is extracted hereunder:

“The petitioners have filed the above writ petitions to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to process the petitioners' application dated 15.05.2017, 06.01.2016, 11.01.2016 and grant patta in respect of S.Nos.375, 373/2A respectively in Nerkundram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Tiruvallur District in favour of the petitioners without insisting No Objection Certificate from the second respondent within a time frame.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that originally Section 4(1) Notification was issued for acquisition of the lands on 11.06.1975 and 09.06.1978 in G.O.Rt.No.124 Housing, dated 08.05.1975 and G.O.Ms.Nos.996, 993, 994 Housing, dated 07.06.1978. Challenging the Notification issued under Section 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, the land owner preferred writ petitions in W.P.Nos.8370 and 8371 of 1986 and the Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 21.01.1988 allowed the writ petitions and quashed the declaration under Section 6 of the Act and directed the authorities to conduct enquiry under Section 5A of the Act afresh.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner in W.P.No.8371 of 1986 preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.18379 of 1991 challenging Section 4(1) Notification dated 11.06.1995. This Court, by order dated 01.07.1999 quashed the Section 4(1) Notification dated 11.06.1975 and allowed the writ petition. In para 3 of the order passed in the said writ petition, this Court also recorded that the possession of the land was handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board on 25.07.1986.

4. The petitioners, after their purchase from the original land owner, had applied for issuance of patta before the first respondent. The first respondent directed the petitioners to get No Objection Certificate from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the reason that the land was acquired by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that once Section 4(1) Notification has been quashed by this Court, the Housing Board has no right over the acquired lands. Admittedly, neither the Housing Board nor the State Government have challenged the orders passed in the earlier writ petitions. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the order passed in W.P.Nos.8370 and 8371 of 1986, dated 21.01.1988 and in W.P.No.18379 of 1991, dated 01.07.199 have become final.

6. Mr.Vivekavanan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, submitted that the Housing Board had taken possession of the land, as early as on 25.07.1986 and also deposited the Award amount before the Civil Court. The learned Standing Counsel further submitted that Award was passed on 30.05.1986 in Award No.1 of 1986. In these circumstances, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Housing Board submitted that the possession is still with the Housing Board and the petitioners have no right to get patta from the first respondent.

7. Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government P

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