S PALANI VELAYUTHAM Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR TIRUNELVELI TAMIL NADU
LAWS(SC)-2009-8-90
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADRAS)
Decided on August 07,2009

S PALANI VELAYUTHAM Appellant
VERSUS
DISTRICT COLLECTOR TIRUNELVELI TAMIL NADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.V. Raveendran, J. - (1.) Leave granted. Heard the learned Counsel.
(2.) Certain lands in Pazhavoor village were acquired under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act. Notice regarding acquisition was served on respondents 3 to 6 who were shown as the owners of the land in the revenue records. Respondents 3 to 6 informed the Collector (first respondent) that they were only life estate holders and that the vested remaindermen should be served with notice. But notice was not issued to them. On the other hand; second respondent passed an award on 3.6.1997. Thereafter, possession of the acquired lands was taken and made into plots and distributed to intended beneficiaries.
(3.) Appellants 1 to 4 filed a writ petition alleging that the acquired lands originally belonged to one S. Kanthimathinatha Pillai; that under a registered will, he bequeathed the said lands to his grandchildren (appellants and respondents 7 to 18) subject to a life interest in favour of his sons (respondents 3 to 6); and that thus the appellants and respondents 7 to 18, who were the children of respondents 3 to 6, were the vested remaindermen in regard to the said lands. They contended that the acquisition proceedings were illegal and liable to be quashed for want of notice of acquisition to the vested remaindermen who were persons interested. The said contention raised in the writ petition was purely a legal contention. A learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court accepted the said legal contention and held that the acquisition without issue of notice to them was illegal. He therefore allowed the writ petition by order dated 13.11.2001 and set aside the acquisition, reserving liberty to respondents 1 and 2 to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings after appropriate notice to the writ petitioners. The order of the learned Single Judge was challenged by respondents 1 and 2 in a writ appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.