Appeal against order quashing notification under Section 4(1) and Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act. Court held acquisition ceased, owner entitled to possession/compensation, and refused interference with lower court's order dismissing the writ petition.
Writ petition stands dismissed; no costs; Miscellaneous Petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
W.A.NO.2061 OF 2011 AND M.P. NO.1 OF 2011
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
No.493, Anna Salai,
Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. ...Appellant / Third Party
versus
1.U.S.Ambika
2.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by the Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development,
Fort St. George,
Madras – 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar-II,
Land Acquisition,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board Scheme,
Arignar Anna Complex,
Thirumangalam,
Madras – 600 102. ...Respondents / Respondents No.1 & 2
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order passed in W.P. No.18046 of 1992 dated
20.07.1999.
Prayer of W.P.No.18046 of 1992 : To issue a Writ of Certiorari
calling for the records pertaining to the issue of the
notification under sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition in
G.O.Ms.No.826, Housing, dated 15.05.1978 and published in the
Gazette on 07.06.1978 and the section 6 declaration made in
G.O.Ms.No.389, Housing and Urban Development dated 06.06.1981
and published in the Gazette on 06.06.1981 in so far as the
petitioner's land is concerned, comprised in S.No.292/1A
Tambaram Village of an extent of 33 ½ cents in Tambaram Village,
Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpattu District.
For Appellant :Dr.R.Gowri
For Respondents :Mr.T.Arunkumar,
Government Advocate for R2 & R3
No appearance for R1
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by T.RAJA,J.)
Tamil Nadu Housing Board has brought this appeal
challenging the impugned order dated 20.07.1999 passed in Writ
Petition No.18046 of 1992.
2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted
that after Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act in G.O. Ms.No.826 dated 15.05.1978 and Section 6
Declaration in G.O. Ms. No.389 Housing and Urban Development
dated 06.06.1981 were issued for the purpose of Tambaram
Neighbourhood Scheme in Tambaram, proposing to acquire 58.59½
acres of land, the first respondent/writ petitioner and others
have filed Writ Petition Nos.11814 & 16866 of 1990 and 18046 of
1992 stating that the publication of the substance of the
notification in the locality having not been made validly in the
village, the entire acquisition proceedings are vitiated.
Learned counsel for the appellant would further contend that the
learned Single Judge ought to have impleaded the Housing
Board/appellant herein as one of the respondents in the above
writ petitions. Even without going into the merits of the case,
mechanically following the earlier order, the learned Single
Judge allowed the writ petitions, though the facts are
different. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that
in respect of the land in question covered in S.No.292/1A1A1,
having an extent of 33½ cents, till date, the Housing Board has
not taken physical possession. Secondly, the above scheme has
not been executed for the past 40 years in the land belonging to
the first respondent herein.
3.Learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 2
and 3 submitted that till date, the physical possession of the
land in question continues to be with the first respondent
because the physical possession has not been taken over,
although the compensation has been submitted in the Court.
4.But we are unable to agree with the submission made by
the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. The reason
being that firstly, when Notification under Section 4(1) of the
Land Acquisition Act and Section 6 Declaration were quashed by
this Court in the aforementioned writ petitions dated
20.07.1999, the authority or power to make use of the land
belonging to the first respondent ceased to exist and
consequently, the power of vesting is also disappeared.
Secondly, as the land owner becomes the owner of the land, the
first respondent, who is the legal owner of the land, is
entitled to re-possess the land as a matter of right. However,
interestingly, in this case, the physical possession has not
been taken by the Government or the Housing Board till date.
Thirdly, the first respondent has not even received any
compensation. Fourthly, the scheme has also not been
implemented in respect of the land belonging to the first
respondent. Therefore, we are unable to interfere with the order
passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ
petition stands dismissed. Consequently, M.P. No.1 of 2011 is
closed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-VIII)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar
vga
To
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by the Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development,
Fort St. George,
Madras – 600 009.
2.The Special Tahsildar-II,
Land Acquisition,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board Scheme,
Arignar Anna Complex,
Thirumangalam,
Madras – 600 102.
+1cc to the Government Pleader SR.No.43388
W.A.No.2061 of 2011 and M.P. No.1 of 2011
SRA(CO)
RVM(21/09/2021)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should interfere with the Single Judge's order quashing notification under Section 4(1) and Section 6 declaration of the Land Acquisition Act regarding land belonging to the first re
2 provisions across 1 enactments
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board
U.S.Ambika
The State of Tamil Nadu
The Special Tahsildar-II, Land Acquisition
T. RAJA
T. V. THAMILSELVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court