ORDER

The present petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order dated 06.04.2011 which was passed by the 1st Respondent vide G.O.Ms.No. 54, Highways and Minor Ports (HF2) department and to direct the First Respondent to reconsider its decision in exercise of Power Under Section 48 B of Land Acquisition Act and pass fresh orders in the light of the decision reported in 2006 (4) CTC 290 as directed by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in its order dated 12.01.2009 in W.A.No.2686/2003.

2. Despite very many opportunities, the counsel for the petitioner had not come forward to prosecute the case. Even today there is no appearance for the petitioner. Since, this Writ Petition is of the year 2017, this Court is inclined to take up the matter for final disposal and decide the same on merits based on the materials available on record.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the land comprised in Survey Numbers 4031/1 & 4041/1 with R.S.No.4032/1, was purchased by the petitioner vide the sale deed dated 17.10.1958. The land in R.S.No. 4032/1 measuring to an extent of 5 Cawnies 7 Grounds 1614 square feet of lad for public purpose, was acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu, invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide G.O.R.No.984, dated 30.07.1959, vide notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act for the formation of Housing Colony for Chennai Port Trust Employees, pursuant to which, in the year 1996, the 2nd Respondent had put up a Sporting Complex in the said land. Challenging the above acquisition, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.No.3417 of 1996 which was dismissed on 10.06.2003 against which, Writ appeal was preferred before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2686 of 2003, which was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file the petition for re-conveyance of the lands under Section 48(b) of the Act, pursuant to which, the petitioner made an application seeking for re- conveyance before the 1st Respondent, however, the said application was rejected vide the present impugned order dated 06.04.2011. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

4. On the above contentions, this Court, heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

5. It is borne out from the materials available on record that the petitioner's land was acquired for the purpose of construction of housing colonies for the Chennai Port Trust employees and possession was taken from the petitioner. Further, pursuant to the said acquisition, award was passed in respect of the petitioner's land and the compensation amount was also received by the petitioner.

6. However, it is the claim of the petitioner that, the land which was acquired has not been utilized for the purpose for which it was acquired. It is to be pointed out, that, once the land has been acquired and compensation has been paid, it is within the domain of the acquisition body to which the land and the petitioner as a matter of right, cannot claim re-conveyance for the mere reason that the lands have not be utilized for the purpose it was acquired. That apart, the acquisition proceedings have been completed and the subject land was taken over by the Government.

7. Further, the above view of this Court is in-subscription of the view taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu Housing Board Vs. Keeravani ammal and others reported in AIR 2007 SC 1691. This Court finds no merit in the petition and this Court cannot interfere with the impugned order passed by the respondents.

“11. We may also notice that once the piece of land has been duly acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, the land becomes the property of the State. The State can dispose of the property thereafter or convey it to anyone, if the land is not needed for the purpose for which it was acquired, only for the market value that may be fetche