Madras High Court
P.Karuppayee vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 April, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.04.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014
P.Karuppayee ... Petitioner
versus
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Social Welfare Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai.
2. The District Collector,
Madurai District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Madurai.
4. The District Adhi Dravidar and
Scheduled Tribes Welfare Officer,
Madurai – 625 020.
5. The Special Tahsildar,
Adhi Dravidar Welfare Department,
Unit – II, Madurai.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
6. The Tahsildar,
Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
seeking for the issuance of Writ of Declaration, to declare the Tamil
Nadu Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 as unconstitutional and
consequently, direct the respondents to re-convey the petitioner's land
in Survey Nos.54/7A, 54/7B, 54/8A, 54/8B, 54/9, 54/10, 54/11, 54/12,
54/17 and 54/5Ain the Velichanatham Village, Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Kannan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran,
Additional Advocate General,
assisted by
Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh,
Additional Govt. Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a writ of declaration declaring the
Tamil Nadu Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978, as unconstitutional
and also for a consequential direction to the respondents to re-convey
the petitioner's land in Survey Nos.54/7A, 54/7B, 54/8A, 54/8B, 54/9,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
54/10, 54/11, 54/12, 54/17 and 54/5A, in Velichanatham Village,
Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his lands in the above
mentioned survey numbers are wet lands and the said lands are
attempted to be acquired by the respondents for developing house sites
for Adi Dravidars of Meenakshipuram, a hamlet of Velichanatham
Village.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submits
that the relief sought for in the writ petition cannot be maintained in
view of the subsequent development and the order passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in G.Mohan Rao and others vs. State of
Tamil Nadu and others, reported in 2021 SCC online SC 440.
However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner's lands, which were acquired in the year 1986, were not
put into use for the past 35 years and instead, the Government
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
identified another land for allotting house sites for Adi Dravidars of
Meenakshipuram, a hamlet of Velichanatham Village and now, all the
Adi Dravidars have been accommodated in another land and now, the
petitioner's lands remain vacant. He also reiterated that the lands are
wet lands and it is the policy of the Government not to acquire the wet
lands for housing scheme. The learned counsel, by relying upon the
letter of Housing and Urban Development Department dated
29.01.1988 and G.O.Ms.No.1168, H&UD dated 05.08.1987 submits
that the Government, vide the letter dated 29.01.1988, directed that in
future, while sending the proposals for acquisition of lands involving
wet and dry lands for housing scheme to Government for approval, it
should be explained in detail that there are no poramboke lands
available for the purpose and that the acquisition of the wet and dry
lands proposed for acquisition is unavoidable. Therefore, when the
policy of the Government is not to acquire wet lands for the purpose of
housing scheme and the petitioner's lands which were acquired for the
purpose of housing scheme were not put into use and remain vacant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
Therefore, the District Collector may take a further decision for
considering the reconveyance of lands to the petitioner. He further
submits that the petitioner has not received any compensation for the
lands which were acquired by the respondents.
4. The learned Additional Advocate General, by referring the
Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Tamil
Nadu and others vs. Ananthi Ammal and others, reported in 1995 1
SCC 519 submits that the validity of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of
Land for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, 1978, has been declared as
intra vires as early in the year 1995 and therefore, this writ petition
filed challenging the said Act in the year 2014 is not maintainable.
However, the learned Additional Advocate General admitted the
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of
pending litigation, they have identified some other lands for
accommodating Meenaksipuram Adi Dravidar community people and
they have already been given patta and the petitioner's lands remain
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
vacant. He also submits that the award has been passed on 04.03.1970
and award amount has also been deposited before the District Treasury,
Madurai, on 16.02.1981.
5. This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials placed on record.
6. This writ petition was filed for declaration, declaring the Tamil
Nadu Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978, as unconstitutional and also
for a consequential direction to reconvey the petitioner's land which
were acquired in the year 1970.
7. The petitioner's lands were acquired by the Government as per
the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan
Welfare Schemes 1978. According to the petitioner, the lands have not
been utilized for the said purpose and remain vacant. Therefore, she
seeks for re-conveyance of her lands.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
8. It appears that the petitioner has already filed a writ petition in
W.P.(MD)No.2134 of 2012 before this Court and this Court, by order
dated 17.09.2014, dismissed the writ petition by observing that there is
no provision in the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan
Welfare Schemes Act, 1978, empowering any of the authorities to
reconvey the lands acquired under the Act. In the said writ petition, the
petitioner further claimed that the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013, has come into effect and as per the provision of the said Act,
she is entitled for reconveyance of the lands. This Court has also
rejected the said contention stating that the Act 2013 has not repealed
the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes,
1978 and therefore, the question of invoking the provisions of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 does not arise.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
9. Since there is no provision under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition
of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 for reconveyance of
the land, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
27.04.2023
ogy
NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
Internet : Yes / No.
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
Social Welfare Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai.
2. The District Collector,
Madurai District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Madurai.
4. The District Adhi Dravidar and
Scheduled Tribes Welfare Officer,
Madurai – 625 020.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
5. The Special Tahsildar,
Adhi Dravidar Welfare Department,
Unit – II, Madurai.
6. The Tahsildar,
Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
W.P.(MD)No.17202 of 2014
27.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
