ALAGU Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR MADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the Writ Petitions are filed challenging the notification dated 27. 11. 1998 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition act, in so far as the petitioners'lands are concerned.

(2.) W. P. No. 4920 of 1999:- First petitioner for herself and on behalf of the petitioners 2 and 3 has filed the affidavit. It is stated that originally, the property, which is sought to be acquired, viz. , 0. 58. 0 hectares (about 1. 47 acres) of land in S. No. 31/3 at Ayyur village, was in the name of solaimalai Gounder. His three sons are, 1) Late Thirumal, the husband of the first petitioner; 2) Dinakaran, second petitioner and 3) Damodaran, vendor of the third petitioner. After the death of Solaimalai Gounder, his three sons partitioned the lands. Thirumal expired in 1995. His death has been duly informed to the Revenue Officials. After oral partition and after the death of thirumal, his wife the first petitioner is looking after his share. Likewise, the second petitioner is cultivating the land and paying kist for his share separately. Mr. Damodaran, sold his share to the third petitioner. After purchase, the third petitioner is paying kist in his own name. The revenue records however, remained in the name of the husband of the first petitioner, who died. But without ascertaining these facts, the Village Administrative officer handed over a notice dated 28. 2. 1999 in Form No. III issued in the name of late Thirumal to the first petitioner. In the notice, second respondent informed that enquiry will be conducted on 16. 3. 1999. At this point of time only, the first petitioner came to know that the first respondent issued a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978) dated 27. 11. 1998 in a Special District Gazette bearing No. 17 for acquiring the lands. The impugned Section 4 (1) Notification and notice in Form No. I under Rule 3 has been issued in the name of dead person, viz. , late Thirumal, the husband of the first petitioner. No notice was issued to all the petitioners in the writ petition. All the three petitioners claim title and ownership of the property and that they are the persons interested. Therefore, they claim that they should have been duly intimated by the authorities before they proceeded to acquire the lands in question. Therefore, the Notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act is challenged inter alia on the ground that the notice to the land owners as contemplated under Section 4 (2) of the land acquisition Act read with Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition for Harijan welfare Schemes Rules, 1979 (Tamil Nadu Act 31/1978) has not been issued and therefore, the Notification has to be set aside.

(3.) ALL the Writ petitions were filed on 19. 3. 1999. This court by order dated 25. 3. 1999 directed the Government Pleader to get the records in view of the short question involved (i. e.) with regard to service of notice. On 26. 4. 1999 while admitting the writ petitions, interim stay of dispossession alone was granted and the same was made absolute on 23. 8. 2003.