Tamil Nadu Housing Boardrep. By its ChairmanAnna Salai, Madras 35 v. A.P. Damodrasamy (died)2.The State of Tamil Nadurep. By its SecretaryHousing and Urban

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED:04.04.2007CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAMANDTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TAMILVANANWRIT APPEAL Nos.1289, 4162, and 4163 of 2004Tamil Nadu Housing Boardrep. By its ChairmanAnna Salai, Madras 35... Appellant in WA.No.1289/2004vs.1. A.P. Damodrasamy (died)2.The State of Tamil Nadurep. By its SecretaryHousing and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, Fort St. GeorgeMadras.3.The Special TahsildarHousing Board Scheme No.2Office of the CollectorCoimbatore.4.Andal Ammal5.D. Jayachandran (R.4 and R.5 were impleaded as party respondents vide order of Court dt.29.03.2007 made in WAMP.No.67/07.).. Respondents in WA.No.1289/041.Andal Ammal2.Jayachandran.. Appellants in WA. Nos.4162 and 4163 of 2004.vs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

1.The State of Tamil Nadurep. By its SecretaryHousing and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, Fort St. GeorgeMadras.2.The Special TahsildarHousing Board Scheme No.2Office of the CollectorCoimbatore.3.Tamil Nadu Housing Boardrep. By its ChairmanAnna Salai, Madras... Respondents in WA. Nos.4162 and 4163 of 2004.Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent againstthe order of The Honourable Mr. Justice C. Nagappan dt. 8.8.2003 inW.P.No.12029 of 1996, and that of the Honourable Mr.Justice D.Murugesan,in WP.Nos.12030 and 12031 of 1996 dated 17.04.2004 respectively.WP.No.12029/1996: To issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the recordsrelating to the notification under Section 4[1] of the Land AcquisitionAct 1894 published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.14A Part II,Section 2[Supplement] dated 13.04.1994 pursuant to GO MS 186 Housingand urban Development dated 24.02.1994 and consequent notification underSection 6 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, published in the Tamil NaduGovernment Gazette No.239, Part II, Section 2 dated 08.05.1995 pursuantto G.O.MS.No.491 Housing and Urban Development LA.3[2] dated 5.5.1995issued by the Ist Respondent and quashing the same in so far as itrelates to the petitioner's land in S.F.No.269-1-270-1 measuring anextent of 0.790 and 1.68.5 hectares respectively in Vilankurichivillage, Coimbatore North Taluk, Coimbatore district.WP.12030 / 1996: To call for the records relating to the notificationunder Section 4[1] of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, published in theTamil Nadu Government Gazette No.23A Part II – Section 2 [Supplement]dated 14.06.1995 pursuant to G.O.MS.No.506 Housing and Urban Development[LA.3[2] dated 17.05.1995 and the consequent declaration under Section 6of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 published in the Tamil NaduGovernment Gazette No.286 Part II Section 2 dated 17.06.1996 pursuant toG.O.Ms.No.291, Housing and Urban Development [LA.3[2] dated 17.06.1996and quashing the same in so far as it related to the petitioner's landin S.F.No.267/6 and 268/4 Vilankurichi village, Coimbatore North Taluk,Coimbatore North Taluk, Coimbatore District measuring an extent 1.055.0hectares and 0.82.5 hectares respectively. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ WP.No.12031/1996:To call for the records of the proceedings relating to thenotification under Section 4[1] of the Land Acquisition Act 1894published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.20 A, Part II, Section2 [Supplement] dated 24.05.1995 pursuant to G.O.MS.No.480 Housing andUrban Development [LA.5[2] dated 27.04.1995 and the consequentdeclaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 publishedin the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.254-II Section 2 dated27.05.1996 pursuant to G.O.M.No.281, Housing and Urban Development LA.3[2]1 dated 24.05.1996 issued by the 1st Respondent and quashing the samein so far as it relates to the petitioner's land in S.F.No.235 to 236 inVilankurichi village, Coimbatore [North] Taluk, Coimbatore Districtmeasuring an extent of 4.20 hectares and 3.59.5 hectares respectively. For appellant : Mr. P.S.Raman, in WA.No.1289/04 Addl. Advocate General-I& for R.3 in for Mr. K. ChelladuraiWA.Nos.4162&4163of 2004.For appellants in : Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy,Sr.CounselWA.Nos.4162 & 4163 for Mrs. Gladys Danielof 2004 & For R.4 and 5 in WA.No.1289 of 2004. For respondents : Mr. K. Elango 2 and 3 in WA.1289/04 Spl. Govt., Pleaderand Respondents 1 and 2in WA.Nos.4162 and 4163/2004..COMMON JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court delivered by P. SATHASIVAM,J.)Aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge dated 08.08.2003made in W.P.No.12029 of 1996, allowing the writ petition and quashingthe acquisition proceedings, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board has filedW.A.No.1289 of 2004.2. Challenging the order dated 17.04.2004 made in W.P.Nos.12030 and12031 of 1996, dismissing the said writ petitions, the legal heirs oforiginal writ petitioner, A.P. Damodarasamy have filed W.A.Nos.4162and 4163 of 2004. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. In view of death of the original writ petitioner, viz., A.P.Damodarasamy, his legal heirs, viz., wife Andal Ammal and son D.Jayachandran, filed WAMP.No.67 of 2007 to implead them as respondents 4and 5 in W.A.No.1289 of 2004. In view of the reasons stated in theaffidavit filed in support of the above petition, we ordered the saidpetition.4. In W.A.Nos.4162 and 4163 of 2004, the appellants have filedWAMP.Nos.68 and 69 of 2007, seeking permission to raise additionalgrounds in the appeals. By order dated 29.03.2007, we allowed both thesaid applications.5. At the request of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Government ofTamil Nadu initiated acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition(Central) Act, 1962, for construction of houses under GanapathiNeighbourhood Scheme Phase II. As stated earlier, in WP.No.12029 of1996, the learned single Judge (C. Nagappan,J.), quashed the acquisitionproceedings on the ground that publication of Notification underSections 4 (1) and 6 of the Act was not published in one English daily.In the other two writ petitions filed by Late Damodarasamy, thelearned single Judge (D. Murugesan,J.), rejecting all the contentions,refused to interfere with the acquisition proceedings and dismissed boththe said writ petitions.6. We heard Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel for theland owners, Mr. P.S. Raman, learned Additional Advocate General-I forthe Tamil Nadu Housing Board and Mr. K. Elango, Special GovernmentPleader for the State.7. Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel appearing for theland owners has raised the following contentions:(i)The notification issued under Section 4(1) ofthe Act by the Government of Tamil Nadu,authorised the Special Tahsildar (LandAcquisition), Housing Scheme Unit III toperform the functions under Section 3 ( c ) ofthe Act, but the notice and proceedings underSections 5-A and 5-A(2) of the Act show that thesame had been conducted by the Special Tahsildar(Land Acquisition) Housing Scheme Unit II. Inthe absence of amendment to the notification,the action taken by the Special Tahsildar, (LandAcquisition), Housing Scheme Unit II cannot besustained; as such the entire acquisitionproceedings are liable to be quashed;(ii)The Government has not considered the reportof the Collector, instead declaration was passedon the basis of the report of the Special https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Commissioner, who has no role in the presentacquisition proceedings; hence, the declarationmade under Section 6 of the Act is not a validone and on this ground the acquisitionproceedings are liable to be interfered; and(iii)The award passed in all these cases were notduly approved by the Government or the authorityauthorised; hence, on this ground also theacquisition proceedings are liable to beinterfered.8. With regard to first contention, it is brought to our noticethat in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, theGovernment of Tamil Nadu, authorised the Special Tahsildar (LandAcquisition), Housing Scheme Unit III to perform the functions underSection 3(c) of the Act. A perusal of the notice issued under Section5-A as well as the proceedings under Section 5-A (2) show that theentire proceedings under Section 5-A of the Act had been conducted onlyby the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Housing Scheme Unit II.As rightly pointed out by Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counselfor the land owners, the authorisation given by the State Government forissuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Act is a statutory one.Unless and until the amendment to the notification is issued by theGovernment, authorising the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) HousingScheme Unit II, to perform the functions under Section 3( c ) of theAct, he has no jurisdiction to exercise the statutory functions. Inthose circumstances, as rightly pointed out, the proceedings initiatedby him under Section 5-A of the Act is void, as the same is done withoutjurisdiction. Similarly, the award proceedings had also been conductedby the very same Officer without any statutory authorisation, as suchthe awards are also liable to be quashed.9. Mr. P.S. Raman, learned Additional Advocate General-I, submittedthat, it is true that as per the notification, it was Special Tahsildar(Land Acquisition), Housing Scheme Unit III was authorised to performthe functions of Collector under Section 3 ( c ) and the entireproceedings under Section 5-A and thereafter, it was conducted by theSpecial Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Housing Scheme Unit II.Admittedly, the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Housing SchemeUnit II had no such statutory authorisation. However, the learnedAdditional Advocate General submitted that Unit I, II, and III weremerged and only the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Housing SchemeUnit II performed the functions under the Act. But, there is noevidence by way of errata or amendment to 4(1) notification or an orderempowering the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Housing SchemeUnit II to perform the functions under Section 3( c )of the Act.10. In this regard, Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned senior counsel https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ for the land owners has pressed into two decisions of this Court;(i)1992 (2) Law Weekly 275 (A. Vijayarangam & another vs. State of TamilNadu); and(ii)An unreported judgment of the learned single Judge rendered inW.P.Nos.10268, 10269 and 13956 of 1996 dated 16.04.2004. 11. In the first case, K.S. Bakthavatsalam,J. has observed thatSection 3(c) of the Act defines the "Collector" including the DeputyCollector and officer specifically appointed by appropriate Governmentto perform the functions of Collector under the Act. Relying onSections 4, 5-A has concluded that, an officer specially appointed bythe appropriate Government under the Land Acquisition Act alone canconduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and any enquiry conductedby any other officer will be without jurisdiction, illegal and the samewill be non-est in the eye of law. In the case before him, in thenotification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, the Special Tahsildar(ADW) Gudiyatham alone was specially appointed to conduct the enquiryunder Section 5-A of the Act. No other notification was brought to thenotice of the learned Judge authorising the Special Tahsildar (ADW),Tirupatthur to perform the functions of a Collector and to conduct theenquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. After finding that in the absenceof proper authorisation by the appropriate Government, the learned Judgequashed the proceedings of the Special Tahsildar (ADW) Gudiyatam andallowed the writ petition. In the later decision, Prabha Sridevan,J.following the decision of K.S. Bakthavatsalam,J. in 1992 (2) Law Weekly275 (cited supra), after finding that the officer authorised to performthe functions was Special Tahsildar Unit III, Coimbatore, but therecords show that the enquiry was conducted by the Special Tahsildar,Unit II, quashed the acquisition proceedings.12. As discussed earlier, the authorised person is to performfunctions under Section 3 ( c ) of the Act, the same being a statutoryone, we hold that unless the officer is duly authorised by way ofnotification or order by the Government, he cannot perform the functionsas provided in the Act. In the cases on hand, admittedly, the SpecialTahsildar (Land Acquisition), Housing Scheme Unit II, who performed thefunctions under Section 3 (c) and the proceedings issued under Section5-A, was not duly authorised by way of notification or order by theGovernment; hence, the action taken by him in all the subsequentproceedings are liable to be quashed.13. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional AdvocateGeneral, even if we accept the above argument, there would not be anyimpediment in retaining the very same notification and permitting theGovernment to proceed further by rectifying the mistake. However, evenaccording to him, as on date (i.e., on the date of hearing), only twodays/one day available for the Government for completion of the entireacquisition proceedings as per the provisions of the Act. In suchcircumstances, even if this Court permits, the same cannot be completed.Accordingly, we have no other option except to quash the entire https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ acquisition proceedings, including 4(1) notification in all the threecases.14. In view of our conclusion in respect of the first contentionraised by the learned senior counsel for the land owners, we are of theview that there is no need to consider the other two contentions.In these circumstances, the entire acquisition proceedings arequashed. Consequently, the Writ Appeal No.1289 of 2004 filed by theHousing Board is dismissed; W.A.Nos.4162 and 4163 of 2004 filed by theland owners are allowed. No costs. It is made clear that, if theGovernment so desires, they are free to proceed afresh in accordancewith law. Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.khTo1.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Housing BoardAnna Salai, Madras 35.2.The Secretary State of Tamil NaduHousing and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, Fort St. GeorgeMadras.3.The Special TahsildarHousing Board Scheme No.2Office of the CollectorCoimbatore.+ 1 CC To Mr.Gladys Daniel, Advocate SR NO.21555+ 1 CC To Mr.K.Chelladurai, Advocate SR NO.21904+ 2 CCs to the Government Pleader SR NO 21500, 21502mbs[co]Gp/12.4 W.A.Nos.4162, 4163 & 1289/2004