Madras High Court
Padmanaban vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 31 August, 2021
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 31.08.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016 and
WMP.Nos.35782, 37028 to 37032 of 2016
WP.No.41803 of 2016
Padmanaban ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Chennai – 600 009
2.The District Collector,
Vellore
3.The Special Tahsildhar,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Vellore ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a writ of declaration declaring the entire acquisition proceedings in
respect of the lands comprised in S.No.41/2A, Abdullapuram Village,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
Vellore Taluk and District as having been lapsed in terms of section 24(2)
of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Act 30 of 2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.V.Karthikeyan
For Respondents : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan,
Government Advocate
COMMON ORDER
The writ petitions have been filed to declare the the entire acquisition
proceedings with regard to the petitioners' lands as having been lapsed in
terms of section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Act 30 of
2013.
2. Heard, Mr.S.V.Karthikeyan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, Government Advocate appearing for
the respondents.
3. The petitioners have filed these writ petitions raising two grounds
i.e. possession has not taken and also compensation was not paid. On
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
perusal of records, revealed that the petitioners already challenged the
acquisition proceedings in the year 1992 itself. Thereafter, the same were
dismissed. They also filed writ petition for re-conveyance of the lands and
the same was also rejected. After new Act i.e. The Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force, the petitioners filed these writ
petitions on the grounds that the possession has not been taken and also
compensation amount was not paid.
4. The third respondent filed counter and produced documents. On
perusal of the counter and documents, revealed that the petitioners already
challenged the acquisition proceedings and the same were negatived by this
Court. The third respondent initiated acquisition proceedings for providing
free house site patta for houseless adidravidar people of Vellore Town. Due
to non availability of vacant land in Vellore town, an extent of 6.42 acres of
dry lands in Abdullapuram and Meimonavur villages had been selected and
Section 4(1) notification was approved and published on 26.09.1988. All
the land owners were called for enquiry and after considering their
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
objections, order has been passed and thereafter award also passed on
18.12.1991 itself. In fact, award has been challenged by some of the
petitioners and the same were also dismissed by this Court for the reason
that there is no error or infirmity in the procedure followed in the process of
acquisition proceedings by order dated 22.07.1999 in WP.No.1351 of 1992.
Thereafter, the petitioners refused to receive the compensation and as such
the award amount had been deposited in the revenue deposit through bank
challan No.4988 of 1987 on 06.02.2003. Thereafter free house site patta was
issued to 138 poor houseless adidravida families. Therefore, already
possession of the subject property had been taken over and also issued free
house site patta to the beneficiaries.
5. The grounds raised by the petitioners in the Writ Petitions have
already been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment
reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129 in the case of Indore Development Authority
Vs. Manoharlal and ors etc., which held as follows :-
“366. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we
answer the questions as under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
1. Under the provisions of Section 24(1)(a) in
case the award is not made as on 1.1.2014 the date
of commencement of Act of 2013, there is no lapse of
proceedings. Compensation has to be determined
under the provisions of Act of 2013.
2. In case the award has been passed within
the window period of five years excluding the period
covered by an interim order of the court, then
proceedings shall continue as provided under
Section 24(1)(b) of the Act of 2013 under the Act of
1894 as if it has not been repealed.
3. The word or used in Section 24(2) between
possession and compensation has to be read as nor
or as and. The deemed lapse of land acquisition
proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013
takes place where due to inaction of authorities for
five years or more prior to commencement of the said
Act, the possession of land has not been taken nor
compensation has been paid. In other words, in case
possession has been taken, compensation has not
been paid then there is no lapse. Similarly, if
compensation has been paid, possession has not
been taken then there is no lapse.
4. The expression 'paid' in the main part of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 does not include a
deposit of compensation in court. The consequence
of non-deposit is provided in proviso to Section 24(2)
in case it has not been deposited with respect to
majority of land holdings then all beneficiaries
(landowners) as on the date of notification for land
acquisition under Section 4 of the Act of 1894 shall
be entitled to compensation in accordance with the
provisions of the Act of 2013. In case the obligation
under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894
has not been fulfilled, interest under Section 34 of
the said Act can be granted. Non-deposit of
compensation (in court) does not result in the lapse
of land acquisition proceedings. In case of non-
deposit with respect to the majority of holdings for
five years or more, compensation under the Act of
2013 has to be paid to the "landowners" as on the
date of notification for land acquisition under
Section 4 of the Act of 1894.
5. In case a person has been tendered the
compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the
Act of 1894, it is not open to him to claim that
acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to
non-payment or non-deposit of compensation in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
court. The obligation to pay is complete by tendering
the amount under Section 31(1). Land owners who
had refused to accept compensation or who sought
reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that
the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under
Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013.
6. The proviso to Section 24(2) of the Act of
2013 is to be treated as part of Section 24(2) not part
of Section 24(1)(b).
7. The mode of taking possession under the Act
of 1894 and as contemplated under Section 24(2) is
by drawing of inquest report/ memorandum. Once
award has been passed on taking possession under
Section 16 of the Act of 1894, the land vests in State
there is no divesting provided under Section 24(2) of
the Act of 2013, as once possession has been taken
there is no lapse under Section 24(2).
8. The provisions of Section 24(2) providing
for a deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in
case authorities have failed due to their inaction to
take possession and pay compensation for five years
or more before the Act of 2013 came into force, in a
proceeding for land acquisition pending with
concerned authority as on 1.1.2014. The period of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
subsistence of interim orders passed by court has to
be excluded in the computation of five years.
9. Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 does not
give rise to new cause of action to question the
legality of concluded proceedings of land
acquisition. Section 24 applies to a proceeding
pending on the date of enforcement of the Act of
2013, i.e., 1.1.2014. It does not revive stale and time-
barred claims and does not reopen concluded
proceedings nor allow landowners to question the
legality of mode of taking possession to reopen
proceedings or mode of deposit of compensation in
the treasury instead of court to invalidate
acquisition.”
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India settled all proposition of
law in the above judgment including the grounds raised by the petitioners.
That apart, the process of acquisition proceedings had been over and the
award amount had been deposited in the revenue deposit through bank
challan No.4988 of 1987 on 06.02.2003. Thereafter free house site patta was
also issued to 138 poor houseless adidravida families. Therefore, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
petitioners failed to satisfy the twin requirements under Section 24 (2) of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 i.e., the physical possession of
the land was not taken and the compensation has not been
paid/tendered/deposited in accordance with law. In view of the dictum laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the issues raised by the
petitioners were settled and therefore, the acquisition proceedings have not
been lapsed by operation of law under Section 24 (2) of the new Act i.e.,
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. In view of the settled position of
law, the writ petitions are devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
7. In the result, the Writ Petitions stand dismissed. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to
costs.
31.08.2021
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Chennai – 600 009
2.The District Collector,
Vellore
3.The Special Tahsildhar,
Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department,
Vellore
WP.Nos.41803 & 43196 to 43200 of 2016
31.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
