P. Vijayalakshmi v. The State Of Tamiilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.01.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.(MD)No.789 of 2016 P.Vijayalakshmi ...

Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its' Secretary Housing & Urban Development, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

2.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

4.The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition) Neighborhood Scheme, Thoothukudi.

5.The Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Tirunelveli.

...

Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the land acquisition award passed by the 4th respondent dated 18.11.1994 in Award No.2/94 A/780/86 in respect of the land in plots No.33, 32 for the extent of 8.35 cents in Survey No.6/1B, situated at Iyan Alampatti Village, Inamaniachi Panchayat, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to repossess the above said land to the petitioner's sister as per Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramasamy For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan, G.A.

O R D E R

This Writ petition is filed challenging the award passed by the 4th respondent dated 18.11.1994 in Award No.2/94 A/780/86 under the Land Acquisition Act.

2.The petitioner has chosen to file the present Writ petition, challenging the said award after such a long period of time namely 21 years only on the reason that the land acquired from the petitioner was not utilized by the Government so far.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.Needless to say that once the land is acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, by passing an award, the petitioner cannot challenge the award that too after a delay of so many years by contending that the land is not utilized.

4.This Court at this length of time is not inclined to entertain the Writ petition that for challenging the award passed as early as on 18.11.1994, also under the facts and circumstances, as it could be seen from the affidavit that the petitioner has not chosen to challenge the acquisition proceedings either against the issuance of 4(1) notification or against the issuance of declaration under Section 6. Even otherwise, the award proceedings alone cannot be challenged after a length of so many years. Therefore, I find no merits to entertain the Writ petition solely on the ground of delay and laches.

5.Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Housing & Urban Development, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

2.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

4.The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition) Neighborhood Scheme, Thoothukudi.

5.The Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Tirunelveli.

+1 CC to the Special Government Pleader, Advocate, SR No.2715 +1 CC to Mr.S.Ramasamy, Advocate, SR No.2473 W.P.(MD)No.789 of 2016 18.01.2016 nbj SH/SKS-RR:01.02.2016:2P/8C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/