Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs C.Sudhakar Reddy on 1 July, 2024
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.07.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013, 1279 & 1280 of 2014,
268 of 2017 & 483 of 2021
and
CMP.Nos.12755 & 1925 of 2021 & 4212 of 2017
and
M.P.Nos.1, 1, 1, 1 & 1 of 2013 and 1, 1 of 2014
W.A.No.1983 of 2021
The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai - 600 009. ... Appellant
Vs.
1. C.Sudhakar Reddy
2. C.Gangarathinam
3. C.V.Muralikrishna
4. C.Vijayasekara Reddy
5. C.Chandra Shekar
6. E.Thulasi
7. K.Thatha Reddy
8. P.Bhasker
9. The Special Deputy Collector (Land
Page No.1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
Acquisition) Chennai Metropolitan,
Development Authority,
Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008.
10. The Central Metropolitan Development
Authority,
Represented by Member Secretary,
Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008. ... Respondents
Prayer:Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order dated 01.07.2013 in W.P.No.2482 of 2003.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Selvendran
Special Government Pleader
For R1 to R8 : Mr.P.Subbareddy
For R10 : Mr.R.S.Sivakumar
Standing Counsel for CMDA
For R9 : No appearance
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Common Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
A batch of writ appeals have been instituted challenging the writ order
quashing Section 4(1) Notification and the subsequent Section 6 Declaration
and the award.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
2. Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader would
submit that the land at Koyambedu, Chennai has been acquired for
developing “Mid West Madras Neighbourhood Land Development Scheme.”
Accordingly, Section 4(1) Notification was issued in G.O.Ms.No.429. The
procedures as contemplated under the Acquisition Act have been followed.
Section 6 Declaration was issued by the competent Authority in
G.O.Ms.No.54 dated 02.02.2000. Section 6 Declaration was published in the
Tamil Nadu Government Gazettee on 02.02.2000 and thereafter, award was
passed in Award No.3 of 2001 dated 05.12.2001.
3. The compensation determined were deposited before the
competent Court. The writ Court after completion of entire process of land
acquisition quashed Section 6 Declaration order and the award and further
direction was issued to the appellant to withdraw the deposited amount from
the Civil Court. Such an order passed by the writ court is not in consonance
with the settled principles in acquisition proceedings. Once the acquisition
proceedings have been completed in all respects and an award has been
passed and the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer has
been deposited in the Civil Court, quashing of Section 6 Declaration would
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
not arise at all. That apart, reasoning given by the learned Single Judge in the
order impugned is running counter to the legal position settled by the
Constitutional courts across the country.
4. We have not chosen to deal with each and every reason stated by
the writ court, since such reasons are already considered by the courts and
settled in catena of judgments. Admittedly, award was passed in Award No.3
of 2001 dated 05.12.2001 and the compensation has been deposited in the
Civil Court.
5. It is needless to state that the erstwhile land owners from whom
the lands are acquired for public purposes are entitled for just compensation
under the provisions of the Acquisition Act. More-so, the land losers are
entitled to seek enhancement of compensation by approaching the competent
Authorities/Forum.
6. In this case, the respondents/land owners are at liberty to
approach the appropriate forum seeking enhancement of compensation within
a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
the event of any such approach, the claim of the land owners are directed to
be decided on merits and in accordance with law. The compensation amount
deposited by the Land Acquisition Officer may be withdrawn by the
respondents/land owners without prejudice to their claim for seeking
enhancement of compensation and other benefits as admissible.
7. However, the acquisition proceedings set aside by the writ court
is infirm and not in consonance with the settled legal principles.
Consequently, all the writ appeals stand allowed. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [C.K., J.]
01.07.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
veda
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
To
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Special Deputy Collector (Land
Acquisition) Chennai Metropolitan,
Development Authority,
Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008.
3. The Central Metropolitan Development
Authority,
Represented by Member Secretary,
Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021, 2384 to 2388 of 2013 etc., (10 cases)
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
veda
W.A.Nos.1983 of 2021,
2384 to 2388 of 2013, etc., (10 cases)
01.07.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
