Madras High Court
V.Rathinavelu vs State Of Tamilnadu on 31 August, 2021
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 31.08.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017 and
WMP.Nos.15739 & 21519 of 2017, 6747 of 2018 and
WMP.Nos.15044 & 21518 of 2017, 6746 of 2018
WP.No.14507 of 2017
V.Rathinavelu ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2.The District Collector,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
3.The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
4.The Special Tahsildar,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Office,
Kallakurichi, Villupuram District 606 202
5.The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 606 401
6.The Village Administrative Officer,
1/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
Vanapuram Village, Ariyalur Post,
Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 605 801
7.Mangai
8.Selvi
9.Tamilarazi
10.Suralammal
11.Sumathi
12.Anjalakshi
13.Banumathi
14.Malar
15.Purani
16.Saritha
17.Sakundhala
(R7 to 17 are impleaded as per order dated 01.02.2018
in WMP.No.20813 of 2017 in WP.No.14507 of 2017)
18.Neela
19.Sheela
20.Pattammal
21.Thilagam
22.Gengaiyammal
23.Thoppuli
24.Palaniyammal
25.Pappa
26.Rajathi
27.Veerammal
28.Alamelu
29.Indirani
30.Chinnapillai
31.Gowriyammal
32.Panchalai
33.Saroja
34.Chinnapillai
35.Nagammal
36.Manjula
2/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
37.Rani
38.Banu
39.Palaniyammal
40.Dhanalakshmi
41.Rajeshwari
42.Manimegalai
43.Tamilselvi
44.Veerammal
45.Selvi
46.Palaniyammal
47.Amudha
48.Kantha
49.Anjalai
50.Veerammal
51.Kuppammal
52.Unnamalai
53.Alamelu
54.Arumbu
55.Sudha
56.Vijiya
57.Vijiya
58.Santhi
59.Annammal
60.Nirmala
61.Govindammal
62.Parimala
63.Thilagavathi
64.Ariyamala
65.Parvathi
66.Mahalakshmi
67.Chandira
68.Panchayi
69.Malliga
70.Arulmozhi
71.Kamatchi
3/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
72.Kala
73.Panjalidevi
74.Sumathi
75.Thurobatha
76.Palaniyammal
77.Chellam
78.Valarmathi
79.Parvathi
80.Ayyammal
81.Ayyammal
82.Arayi
83.Anjalai
84.Rani
85.Jeyashwari
86.Panchavarnam
87.Kalai Amutha
88.Dhalalakshmi
89.Rani
90.Poongavanam
91.Periya
92.Tamilselvi
93.Parimala
94.Asothai
95.Tamaraiselvi
96.Poonga
97.Revathy
98.Arumbu
99.Malliga
100.Veerammal
101.Muniyammal
102.Anandhi
103.Selvamani
104.Parvathi
105.Pattammal
106.Lakshmi
4/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
107.Maili
108.Angammal
109.Parvatham
110.Ellammal
111.Unnamalai
112.Malathi
113.Ramayi
114.Thoppuli
115.Chithra
116.Vatchala
117.Parameswari
118.Radha
119.Amsavalli
120.Vijaya
121.Vijiya
122.Pathma
123.Thavamani
124.Pappaththi
125.Kalpana
126.Manjula
127.Sasikala
128.Kamatchi
129.Kanagavalli
130.Amirdham
131.Santhi
132.Anjalai
133.Dilli
134.Chandra
135.Sivagami
136.Valli
137.Rajammal
138.Dhanalakshmi
139.Ellammal
140.Chandra
141.Saroja
5/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
142.Kamatchi
143.Arukkani
144.Anjalai
145.Kavitha
146.Jothilakshmi
147.Mariyammal
148.Arayi
149.Poongavanam
155.Pathma
(R18 to R150 impleaded as per order dated 31.08.2021
in WMP.No.22830 of 2018 in WP.No.14507 of 2017) ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a writ of declaration declaring that the fourth respondent's
impugned notification under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of
Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978)
dated 22.02.2005 and the second respondent's impugned notification under
section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare
Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act No.31 of 1978) and it was published in
Villupuram District Gazattee dated 19.09.2005 and the fourth respondent's
impugned award proceedings Na.Ka.No.350/04 dated .01.2006, shall be
deemed to have been lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 (The Central Act No.30 of 2013) in respect of the
petitioner's properties in Survey No.131/A3 and 104/4 and vide patta
No.567, total extent of 1.70.50 hectare, situated at Vanapuram Village,
Ariyalur Post, Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District.
6/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Agni Selvaraju
For Respondents
For R1 to 6 : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan,
Government Advocate
For R7 to 17: Mr.R.Kumaravel
WP.No.13859 of 2017
T.Apparasu ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2.The District Collector,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
3.The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
4.The Special Tahsildar,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Office,
Kallakurichi, Villupuram District 606 202
5.The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 606 401
6.The Village Administrative Officer,
Vanapuram Village, Ariyalur Post,
Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 605 801
7/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
7.Mangai
8.Selvi
9.Tamilarazi
10.Suralammal
11.Sumathi
12.Anjalakshi
13.Banumathi
14.Malar
15.Purani
16.Saritha
17.Sakundhala
(R7 to 17 are impleaded as per order dated 16.04.2018
in WMP.No.20812 of 2017 in WP.No.13859 of 2017)
18.Neela
19.Sheela
20.Pattammal
21.Thilagam
22.Gengaiyammal
23.Thoppuli
24.Palaniyammal
25.Pappa
26.Rajathi
27.Veerammal
28.Alamelu
29.Indirani
30.Chinnapillai
31.Gowriyammal
32.Panchalai
33.Saroja
34.Chinnapillai
35.Nagammal
36.Manjula
37.Rani
38.Banu
39.Palaniyammal
8/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
40.Dhanalakshmi
41.Rajeshwari
42.Manimegalai
43.Tamilselvi
44.Veerammal
45.Selvi
46.Palaniyammal
47.Amudha
48.Kantha
49.Anjalai
50.Veerammal
51.Kuppammal
52.Unnamalai
53.Alamelu
54.Arumbu
55.Sudha
56.Vijiya
57.Vijiya
58.Santhi
59.Annammal
60.Nirmala
61.Govindammal
62.Parimala
63.Thilagavathi
64.Ariyamala
65.Parvathi
66.Mahalakshmi
67.Chandira
68.Panchayi
69.Malliga
70.Arulmozhi
71.Kamatchi
72.Kala
73.Panjalidevi
74.Sumathi
9/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
75.Thurobatha
76.Palaniyammal
77.Chellam
78.Valarmathi
79.Parvathi
80.Ayyammal
81.Ayyammal
82.Arayi
83.Anjalai
84.Rani
85.Jeyashwari
86.Panchavarnam
87.Kalai Amutha
88.Dhalalakshmi
89.Rani
90.Poongavanam
91.Periya
92.Tamilselvi
93.Parimala
94.Asothai
95.Tamaraiselvi
96.Poonga
97.Revathy
98.Arumbu
99.Malliga
100.Veerammal
101.Muniyammal
102.Anandhi
103.Selvamani
104.Parvathi
105.Pattammal
106.Lakshmi
107.Maili
108.Angammal
109.Parvatham
10/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
110.Ellammal
111.Unnamalai
112.Malathi
113.Ramayi
114.Thoppuli
115.Chithra
116.Vatchala
117.Parameswari
118.Radha
119.Amsavalli
120.Vijaya
121.Vijiya
122.Pathma
123.Thavamani
124.Pappaththi
125.Kalpana
126.Manjula
127.Sasikala
128.Kamatchi
129.Kanagavalli
130.Amirdham
131.Santhi
132.Anjalai
133.Dilli
134.Chandra
135.Sivagami
136.Valli
137.Rajammal
138.Dhanalakshmi
139.Ellammal
140.Chandra
141.Saroja
142.Kamatchi
143.Arukkani
144.Anjalai
11/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
145.Kavitha
146.Jothilakshmi
147.Mariyammal
148.Arayi
149.Poongavanam
155.Pathma
(R18 to R150 impleaded as per order dated 31.08.2021
in WMP.No.22829 of 2018 in WP.No.13859 of 2017) ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a writ of declaration declaring that the fourth respondent's
impugned notification under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of
Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978)
dated 22.02.2005 and the second respondent's impugned notification under
section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare
Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act No.31 of 1978) and it was published in
Villupuram District Gazattee dated 19.09.2005 and the fourth respondent's
impugned award proceedings Na.Ka.No.350/04 dated .01.2006, shall be
deemed to have been lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 (The Central Act No.30 of 2013) in respect of the
petitioner's properties in Survey No.104/3A and 104/2B, vide patta
Nos.227 and 918, total extent of 1.29.50 hectare, situated at Vanapuram
Village, Ariyalur Post, Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Agni Selvaraju
12/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
For Respondents
For R1 to 6 : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan,
Government Advocate
For R7 to 17: Mr.R.Kumaravel
COMMON ORDER
Both the writ petitions have been filed to issue a writ of declaration
declaring that the fourth respondent's impugned notification under Section 3
of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act,
1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978) dated 22.02.2005 and the second
respondent's impugned notification under section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu
Act No.31 of 1978) and it was published in Villupuram District Gazattee
dated 19.09.2005 and the fourth respondent's impugned award proceedings
Na.Ka.No.350/04 dated .01.2006, shall be deemed to have been lapsed by
virtue of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (The
Central Act No.30 of 2013) in respect of the petitioners' respective
13/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
properties situated at Vanapuram Village, Ariyalur Post, Sankarapuram
Taluk, Villupuram District.
2. Heard, Mr.J.Agni Selvaraju, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, Government Advocate appearing for
the respondents 1 to 6 and Mr.R.Kumaravel, learned counsel appearing for
the respondent 7 to 17.
3. The petitioners already challenged the above acquisition
proceedings in WP.Nos.4784 & 6009 of 2006 before this Court and the
same were dismissed by order dated 23.09.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioners also filed WA.Nos.383 of 2011 & 2397 of 2010 and the same
were dismissed by this Court on 09.03.2011 and 05.01.2011.
4. In the present writ petitions, the petitioners challenged the very
same acquisition proceedings on the ground that the beneficiaries who were
issued free house site patta are not entitled to get patta since already they are
14/24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
wealthy persons. All the beneficiaries are having patta land and some of the
beneficiaries are not married persons. Therefore, they are not entitled to get
free house site patta.
5.The fourth respondent filed counter, which revealed that
Adidravidar people of Vanapuram Village, Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District represented to provide house site to them. Since no
poramboke land was available, acquisition proceedings were initiated under
Tamil Nadu Harijan Welfare Schemes Act 31/1978 and the District
Collector had issued 4(2) authorization to acquire the following lands in
Proc.M2/31134/04 dated 16.02.2005.
RS.No. Classification Extent
104/2B Govt.dry land 0.58.0 hec
104/3A Govt.dry land 0.71.5 hec
104/4 Govt.dry land 1.05.0 hec
131A/3 Govt.dry land 0.65.5 hec
------------
3.00.0 hec or 7.41 acres
In the above mentioned lands, the lands in RS.No.131/A3, 104/4, 104/2B,
104/3A in patta No.567, 918 & 227 were in the name of the petitioners
herein. Hence, 3(1) notice in Form 1 under Section 4(2) of Tamil Nadu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
Acquisition Act (Act No.31 of 1978) was issued to the petitioners and wide
publicity was also made. Accordingly 4(2) enquiry was conducted on
17.03.2005 in the village. The petitioners appeared for the enquiry and
presented an objection petition. The objections were ruled out and 4(1)
notification was published in Villupuram District Gazattee No.17 dated
19.09.2005 and it was published in the locality. The land value was also
fixed by collecting sales statistics and Award enquiry was conducted on
04.01.2006. However, the petitioners refused to accept the determination of
the land value. The award was passed in No.2/2005-2006 on 04.01.2006 and
the compensation amount of Rs.3,19,555/- for the above said acquired land
was deposited in Revenue Deposit in Sub Treasury, Kallakurichi on
20.01.2006.
6.Therefore, the possession of the respective lands was already taken
over and handed over to 144 beneficiaries and they were also issued patta.
Insofar as compensation is concerned, already deposited on 20.01.2006.
Therefore, the writ petitions having been filed on the ground as
contemplated under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013, they failed to prove the same.
7. 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:
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
the treasury instead of court to invalidate
acquisition.”
8. 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, possession of the respective lands was already taken over and handed
over to 144 beneficiaries and they were also issued patta. Insofar as
compensation is concerned, already deposited on 20.01.2006. Therefore, the
petitioners failed to satisfy the twin requirements under Section 24 (2) of the
New Act, 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
9. 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
(2/2)
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
To
1.Secretary to Government,
State of Tamilnadu,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Department,
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2.The District Collector,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
3.The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer,
Collectorate, Villupuram,
Villupuram District 605 602
4.The Special Tahsildar,
Adi Dravidar Welfare Office,
Kallakurichi, Villupuram District 606 202
5.The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 606 401
6.The Village Administrative Officer,
Vanapuram Village, Ariyalur Post,
Sankarapuram Taluk,
Villupuram District 605 801
WP.Nos.14507 & 13859 of 2017
31.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
