Madras High Court
A.Muthulakshmi vs The Chief Secretary on 22 April, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 22.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
A.Muthulakshmi : Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu, St.George Fort, Chennai.
2. The District Collector, Madurai District.
3. The Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Madurai South
(Neighborhood Scheme), Madurai.
4. The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Ellis Nagar, Madurai. : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondents to
re-convey the land comprised in Survey No.89/10, measuring 30 cents in
Thoppur Village in Madurai District, acquired from the petitioner by disposing
the petitioner's representation, dated, 04.03.2010, under Section 48B of Land
Acquisition Act.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Suriya Narayanan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Angappan
Government Advocate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of a Writ of
Mandamus directing the respondents to reconvey the land that was acquired
from the petitioner.
2. Heard Mr.R.Suriya Narayanan, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner and Mr.S.Angappan, learned Government Advocate
appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. It is seen from records that acquisition proceedings were initiated
in the year 1985 and 4(1) notification was issued on 06.10.1985. Thereafter, 6
(1) declaration was made on 14.10.1986. The award enquiry was conducted and
the award proceedings were also passed on 14.10.1988. Even during the award
enquiry, it was attended by one Muthambalam, whose name was found in the
revenue records. He had sold the property in favour of the petitioner. The
compensation was fixed and not being satisfied, Section 18 reference was made
and L.A.O.P.No.07 of 1995, was initiated before the Sub Court, Madurai and
the compensation amount was also enhanced. The enhanced compensation
amount was also deposited.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
4. The fourth respondent / Tamil Nadu Housing Board has filed a
counter affidavit and has taken a very specific stand that the property, which
was acquired was also handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board in order
to proceed further with the Housing Scheme.
5. The fifth respondent has also filed a counter affidavit and has
taken a very specific stand that the petitioner after having received the enhanced
compensation has knocked the doors of this Court seeking for reconveyance of
the land.
6. In the considered view of this Court, the relief sought for by the
petitioner is not sustainable in law. The petitioner has received the enhanced
compensation. The property has also been handed over to the Tamil Nadu
Housing Board. A Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of the
Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Chennai-600 035 Vs.
S.Ganjedran and another reported in (2010) 3 MLJ 643 has categorically held
that the Government loses the right to consider reconveyance once the land has
been handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, unless, the Government
has forfeited the lands as provided under Section 16-B of the Land Acquisition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and has taken back the
possession. The same principles have been culled out by the subsequent
Division Bench in the case of Commissioner, Ambattur Municipality,
Chennai-600 053 and Others Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by
its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai-600
009 and others reported in (2015) 5 MLJ 60.
7. In the present case, the property has already vested with the
Tamil Nadu Housing Board and therefore, there is no question of the
Government exercising its powers under Section 48-B of the Act for
reconveyance of the land. That apart, the counter affidavit filed by the third and
fourth respondents makes it very clear that the property has been handed over to
the Tamil Nadu Housing Board to proceed further to implement the scheme.
8. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merits in this
Writ Petition and accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
22.04.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
tsg
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
NOTE:
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a
web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct
copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu, St.George Fort, Chennai.
2. The District Collector, Madurai District.
3. The Land Acquisition Tahsildar, Madurai South
(Neighborhood Scheme), Madurai.
4. The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Ellis Nagar, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
tsg
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.3170 of 2012
Dated:
22.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
