Baby v. The Managing Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.08.2023 CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE W.P.Nos.23396, 23399, 23400, 23403, 23407 & 23408 of 2022 W.P.No.23396 of 2022 :
Baby .... Petitioner Vs 1.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board CMDA Complex, E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai - 600 107.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I, Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
1/14
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
..... Respondents [R2 to R6 impleaded vide order dated 13.09.2022 made in WMP.No.23502 of 2022 in W.P.No.23396 of 2022] W.P.No.23399 of 2022 :
1.Poovathal (Died) 2.Senniyappa Gounder 3.Baby 4.Rajan 5.Dhandapani 6.Kanakaraj ..... Petitioners [Petitioners 2 to 6 substituted as LRs of the deceased sole petitioner vide order dated 12.01.2023 made in WMP.No.26994/2022 in W.P.No.23399 of 2022] Vs
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board CMDA Complex, E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai - 600 107.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I, Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region 2/14
Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
.... Respondents [R2 to R6 suo motu impleaded] W.P.No.23400 of 2022 :
Rajamani ..... Petitioner Vs
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board CMDA Complex, E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai - 600 107.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I, Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
3/14
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
.... Respondents [R2 to R6 suo motu impleaded] W.P.No.23403 of 2022 :
S.Dhandapani ..... Petitioner Vs
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Nandanam Chennai - 600 035.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
.... Respondents [R2 to R6 suo motu impleaded] 4/14
W.P.No.23407 of 2022 :
S.Rajan ..... Petitioner Vs
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board CMDA Complex, E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai - 600 107.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
....
Respondents [R2 to R6 suo motu impleaded] W.P.No.23408 of 2022 :
Mayilsamy ..... Petitioner Vs 5/14
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Nandanam Chennai - 600 035.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Coimbatore North.
.... Respondents [R2 to R6 suo motu impleaded] Common Prayer in W.P.No.23396, 23399 & 23400 of 2022: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to issue No Objection Certificate in respect of the land comprised in Survey No.539/3A situate at Vellakinar Village, Coimbatore North Taluk and District, to an extent of 0.63 acre respectively to the petitioners forthwith by considering the petitioners' representations dated 19.11.2019 and 02.08.2022. 6/14
Prayer in W.P.No.23403, 23407 & 23408 of 2022: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to issue No Objection Certificate in respect of the land comprised in Survey No.539/2B situate at Vellakinar Village, Coimbatore North Taluk and District, to an extent of 0.50 acre respectively to the petitioners forthwith by considering the petitioners' representations dated 19.11.2019 and 02.08.2022. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Advocate Assisted by Mr.V.Anandamurthy For Respondents : Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.U.Baranidharan for R2 to R6 Mr.D.Veerasekaran for R1 COMMON ORDER 1.1 The petitioners herein own a certain extent of lands in Vellakkinaru Village in Coimbatore Taluk, and the details are provided below : W.P.No.
Petitioner name Extent of land 23396/ 2022 Baby 63 cents in Sy.No.539/3A 23399/ 2022 Poovathal (Died) Legal heirs substituted 63 cents in Sy.No.539/3A 23400/ 2022 Rajamani 63 cents in Sy.No.539/3A 23403/ 2022 Dhandapani 50 cents in Sy.No.539/2B 23407/ 2022 Rajan 50 cents in Sy.No.539/2B 23408/ 2022 Mayilsamy 50 cents in Sy.No.539/2B 7/14
1.2 According to the petitioners, the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.386, Housing and Urban Development, dated 06.09.1996, and G.O.Ms.No.379, Housing and Urban Development, dated 28.10.1997, had acquired the lands for the purpose of a housing scheme and construction of house sites, which also includes the lands of the petitioners herein. Challenging the acquisition, the petitioners herein moved this Court in W.P.No.2970 of 1998, and this Court vide its order dated 24.01.2005, had quashed the said proceedings of the Government, and thereby allowed the writ petition. After a lapse of six years, the Government filed an appeal in 2011, and the same was dismissed even before it was taken on record. Since then no proceedings were initiated by the Government, the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.2970 of 1998 had become final.
However, the petitioners were not able to promote their lands since the other authorities (respondents 4 to 6) as the case may be raised objections, who insisted that the petitioners herein to obtain an NOC from the first respondent, the TNHB for removing the cloud created vis-a-vis the notifications for acquisition stated above. Since, there was no response from the authorities concerned, they are now before this Court in the present writ petitions.
2. Since this Court had impleaded the respondents 2 to 6, as necessary parties in W.P.No.23396 of 2022, this Court deems it appropriate to implead those respondents also in the connected W.P.Nos. 23399, 23400, 23403, 23407 & 23408 of 2022, as the issue involved is one and the same in all these petitions, and accordingly, respondents 2 to 6 herein are impleaded in the connected writ petitions too.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned AAG. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that when the lands of the petitioners were notified for acquisition, intimation was given about it by the Land Acquisition Officer to the other related officials who in turn had promptly notified the same in their records that the survey numbers of the lands of the petitioners were notified for acquisition. Now, despite the fact that the acquisition proceedings have been set aside by this Court, the entries made by respondents 4 to 6 in their record continue, and whenever the petitioners intend to deal with their lands, these authorities resist it on the basis of the earlier entries in their record. They insist the petitioners to obtain a NOC from the TNHB, the beneficiary of the intended acquisition. 9/14
And, hence the petitioners are here before this Court for a direction to the TNHB to issue a NOC as required by the other authorities.
4. Mr.J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General made a fair statement that upon the rejection of the writ appeal preferred by the Government, the decision of this Court in W.P.No.2970 of 1998 has become final. The said statement is recorded.
5. This court wonders why at all a NOC is required to be obtained from TNHB, when it has no subsisting interest in the lands belonging to the petitioners. When the acquisition proceedings had commenced, the beneficiary of the acquisition only had the prospect of having the title to the property proposed to be acquired vested in it. For the title to vest in a beneficiary, the acquisition proceedings should have concluded. Therefore, an aborted, or to be more precise, a force-aborted acquisition proceedings (such in this case where the acquisition proceedings had come to an end under an order of this Court), can never vest title to the property proposed to be acquired in the beneficiary. Therefore, what is the authority in TNHB to issue a NOC, and where is the need to approach it for issuing it? 10/14
6. In fitness of things, all those authorities who had made an endorsement in their respective books/registers/records that the lands in certain survey numbers are notified for acquisition should have corrected the records when once the acquisition proceedings are either dropped or set aside by the court. The Land Acquisition Officer who is prompt in alerting the other authorities such as respondents 4 to 6 about the intended acquisition should have also communicated to the latter mentioned authorities that they should make a reverse entry in their records whenever the acquisition proceedings are dropped or set aside by the Court. His failure to do it cannot be let to reflect on the title holders of the property. This may be a systemic malady, in which case it only requires corrective steps within the system. Instead, to drive the successful land owners again for obtaining NOC is plainly cruel.
7. This court therefore, allows this batch of petitions and modifies the prayer, and directs respondents 4 to 6 to correct their records based on the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.2970 of 1998, dated 24.01.2005 as well as W.A.SR.No.78601 of 2011, within 4 weeks from the date of receipt 11/14
of copy of this Order. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs.
07.08.2023 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order ASR / ds 12/14
To:
1.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board CMDA Complex, E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai - 600 107.
2.The Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Housing and Urban Development Department Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Housing Scheme Unit-I Coimbatore.
4.The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning Coimbatore Region Dr.Nanjappa Road Coimbatore - 641 012.
5.The Sub Registrar Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
6.The Tahsildar Taluk Office Coimbatore North.
13/14
N.SESHASAYEE.J., ds 07.08.2023 14/14