O R D E R

The present petition has been filed seeking to declare the 4(1)

notification dated 11.06.1975 as lapsed and to forebear the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the subject property.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she had purchased the subject property in the year 1997, with a total extent of about 5511 sq.ft from her vendors by way of registered sale deeds. Since then, she was in possession and enjoyment of the said property. The 1st Respondent by a notification published in Tamil Nadu Gazette in the year 1975, had acquired the lands for the total extent of land acres 338.28 cents including the petitioner's land, without issuing a prior notice and a compensation was also not paid to the owners of the property. Though the acquisition was made, however, the physical possession in respect of the lands acquired was not taken by the authorities concerned, even after a lapse of 38 years of the impugned notification of the 1st Respondent herein. The grievance of the petitioner being that neither the physical possession was taken nor any compensation being paid, she has come before this Court by way of a Writ Petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after a lapse of more than three decades, till date, the physical possession of the said lands was not taken, further, the compensation amount towards the acquisition as per Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition was also not paid to the petitioner. Therefore, the Land Acquisition proceedings is deemed to have lapsed. In view of the same, the impugned notification of the 1st Respondent is liable to be quashed and this Writ Petition may be allowed.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents submits that subsequent to the Acquisition, the compensation amount was deposited in the Revenue deposit and the physical possession was also taken. Further, the said lands were handed over to the Government and that being the case, the petitioner being a subsequent purchaser has no locus standi to question the Acquisition Proceedings. Hence, this Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. This Court gave its careful consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. The facts in the present case is not in dispute. The petitioner is a subsequent purchaser and he purchased the lands from one Rani, and the said lands were acquired by the 1st Respondent for the purpose of Ramapuram Neighbourhood scheme in the year 1975. Thereafter, the award was passed and the entire compensation amount was deposited and according to the respondents, possession was also taken by the Government. Now the petitioner filed this Writ Petition for availing benefit of Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation for quashment of the impugned notification.

7. Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 has been pressed into service by the petitioner to contend that where an award under Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid, the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. For better appreciation, the relevant provision is extracted hereunder :-

"Land acquisition process under Act No.I of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894: (a) Where no award under Section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all the provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or (b) When an award under said Section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of t