Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

M Venkatachalam vs The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Its And Others

Madras High Court|18 September, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.09.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P.Nos.20593, 14281 to 14288, 15887 and 15888, 16051 and 16052 of 2016, 1531 to 1533 of 2017, 2513, 15250, of 2016 W.P.No.20593 of 2016 M.Venkatachalam ... Petitioner vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its, Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Dept, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
2. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep.by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, No.493, AnnaSalai, Chennai-600 035.
3. The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
4. The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Housing Scheme, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Declaration declaring that the Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisiton Act 1894 in respect of land bearing Plot No.7 measuring an extent of 1200 Sq.Ft comprised in Survey No.864 of Chennathur Village Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District covered by Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in G.O.Ms.No.890, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 09.10.1992 deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013.
For Petitioners in all WPs : Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondents in all WPs: Mr.S.Diwakar, Spl GP for R1 & R4 Mr.K.Venkatramani, AAG Assisted by Mr.Anandhamoorthy, Standing Counsel for R2 & R3 COMMON ORDER The above writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners to issue writs of Declaration declaring that the Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act 1894, in respect of land bearing Plot Nos.7, 34, 17, 19, 8, 14, 13, 44, 25, 4, 22, 20, 35, 36, 37, 6, 42, 23 and land bearing Old Survey No.844, New Survey No.844/IA5 of Chennathur Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District is covered by Notification issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by G.O.Ms.No.890 of Housing and Urban Development Department dated 29.05.1991 and Declaration issued under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013.
2. Heard, Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.S.Diwakar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent, Mr.K.Venkatramani, Additional Advocate General assisted by assisted by Mr.Anandhamoorthy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.
3. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions are common, by consent of learned counsels on either side, all the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
4. According to the petitioners, the impugned Land Acquisition Proceedings are deemed to have lapsed, in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013. The petitioners contended that to get benefit under Section 24(2) of the Act, two grounds have to be satisfied , viz.,
(i) the possession has not been taken over properly by the respondents; and
(ii) compensation has not been paid or deposited before the Competent Civil Court.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the respondents have not taken possession of the acquired lands so far and that they have not paid or deposited the compensation amount before the competent Civil Court. Further, the learned counsel submitted that challenging the very same Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 29.05.1991 and Section 6 Declaration, dated 09.10.1992, the land owners preferred writ petitions in W.P.No.27224 of 2015, 9753 to 9755 of 2015 before this Court and this Court by order dated 04.04.2016, quashed the acquisition proceedings, by holding that the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act shall be attracted and the entire land acquisition proceedings shall stand lapsed. The learned counsel submitted that the order passed in the said writ petitions dated 04.04.2016 is squarely applies to all the present cases.
6. On a perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it could be seen that the respondents 1 and 4 have not stated anything about the possession taken by them and also with regard to the compensation paid or deposited before the Competent Civil Court.
7. Mr.K.Venkatramani, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents 2 and 3 also submitted that the issue is covered by the order passed in the writ petitions dated 04.04.2016.
8. Further, while allowing all these writ petitions, this Court also followed the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.Rajaram and five others vs. The Secretary to Government and two others in W.A.No.1100 of 2014 dated 26.02.2016, where in the Division Bench after considering the law on the issue held that if the land owner has not been dispossessed or the award has not been passed within five years, the land owner is entitled to protection under Section 24(2) of the Act.
9. In the light of the above, as both the parameteres have been fulfilled, it has to be necessarily held that the respondents are entitled to the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Act.
10. In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed by holding that the provision 24(2) of Act would be attracted and consequently, the entire land acquisition proceedings shall stand lapsed, in so far as the petitioners are concerned. No costs.
18.09.2017 sk Index: Yes/No To
1. The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Dept, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
2. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, No.493, AnnaSalai, Chennai-600 035.
3. The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
4. The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Housing Scheme, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
sk W.P.Nos. 20593 of 2016 and etc., batch 18.09.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M Venkatachalam vs The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Its And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
18 September, 2017
Judges
  • M Duraiswamy