said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. By relying on the said provision, the learned senior counsel submitted that though the award is stated to have been passed on 24.10.2000, the possession has not been taken out and as on date, the petitioner is in possession of the lands. When an attempt was made by the second respondent to interfere with the petitioner's possession, a contempt petition in Contempt No.109 of 2003 was filed and the same was closed after accepting the apology. Further, by referring to the counter affidavit, the learned senior counsel submitted that the compensation has not been deposited into the civil Court but has been deposited in the State Bank of India, Villupuram, which is admitted in the counter affidavit and therefore, the entire land acquisition proceedings are lapsed. In terms of Section 16(2) of the Repealed Act which deals with the procedure contemplated for taking possession of the land to be acquired, the Government would have to pass an order directing any person who may be in possession of the land to surrender or deliver possession to the Collector and if the land owner refuses to hand over possession, the Collector will have to take forcible possession. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner being in possession of the land and he having not been dispossessed in the manner provided under the statute, the entire land acquisition proceedings stand lapsed. Further, the learned senior counsel also urged the grounds raised in the writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings under the said Act stating that the entire proceedings is an outcome of total non-application of mind since the subjective satisfaction of the District Collect is required in the matter which has not been met as the petitioner has objected to the acquisition proceedings stating that the employees of the State Transport Corporation have developed housing colonies and there are houses constructed in the area and there is no scope for extending the existing burial ground.
