IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ W.A.No. 2133 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.15863 of 2022 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, No.493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. ...Appellant Vs.

1.M.Anandhan (Died)

2.M.Bhuvaneswari

3.M.Jagadesan

4.G.Parimala

5.The State of Tamil Naud, Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

6.The Special Tahsildar – II, (Land Acquisition)

Tamil Nadu Housing Board Scheme, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035.

7.Kirupavathi

8.Sam Joseph [R1 died. R7 & R8 are substituted as LRs of deceased R1 vide Court order dated 30.10.2025 made in CMP.No.1754/2025 in W.A.No.2133/2022]

...Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 08.12.2021 made in W.P.No.23047 of 2019.

For Appellant : Dr.N.Moorthi, Standing Counsel for TNHB For Respondents : R1-Died Mr.A.R.Suresh for R2 to 4, 7 & 8 Mrs.Akila Rajendran, Govt.Advocate for R5 & R6 *******

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

Under assail is the writ order dated 08.12.2021 in W.P.No.23047 of

2019.

2. Tamil Nadu Housing Board is the appellant. The respondents 1 to 4 /

erstwhile land owners filed a Writ Petition seeking a direction to pay compensation and also to re-convey the remaining extent of land already acquired.

3. Section 4(1) notification was issued by the competent Authority under the Land Acquisition Act on 02.08.1984. Form 7 notification was issued on 09.01.1989. The 1^st respondent/ erstwhile owner submitted objections on 02.02.1989. On 14.08.1989, the compensation has been deposited under the Revenue Deposit. On 19.08.1989 award No.8 of 1989 was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Admittedly, possession has been handed over by the Government to Tamil Nadu Housing Board for developing housing scheme. Tamil Nadu Housing Board had already developed housing scheme and sold the houses to individuals and executed sale deeds.

4. It is not in dispute that initially W.P.No.6751 of 1990 was filed challenging the acquisition proceedings and the Writ Petition was dismissed on 04.04.1996 upholding the validity of the land acquisition proceedings. After completion of land acquisition proceedings in the year 1989, once again erstwhile land owners filed W.P.No.2929 of 2003 seeking re-conveyance of the acquired lands. This Court directed the Government to consider the representation. The competent Authority rejected the representation submitted by the erstwhile land owners seeking re-conveyance of the acquired land.

5. After a lapse of several years, three Writ Petitions have been filed in the year 2019. The writ Court disposed of the Writ Petitions with a direction to settle compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2013”] by invoking proviso clause to Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. Since the writ Court directed the appellant to settle the compensation under the proviso clause to Section 24 of the Act, 2013 the present intra-Court appeal came to be instituted.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that acquisition proceedings in all respects were concluded in the year 1989. Possession was taken on 21.11.1989 and compensation was deposited on 14.08.1989. Tamil Nadu Housing Board developed project and sold the plots along with houses and executed sale deeds in favour of the allottees. That being so, the respondents 1 to 4 / writ petitioners may be at liberty to withdraw the compensation already deposited in the revenue deposit.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4 /

erstwhile land owners would oppose by stating that the respondents 1 to 4 are entitled to get compensation under proviso clause to Section