Madras High Court
M/S.Navasakthi Townships Developers ... vs The Deputy Collector (Revenue) South on 25 November, 2014
Author: C.S.Karnan
Bench: C.S.Karnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:25 /11/2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN
W.P.No.27616 of 2014 &
M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2014
M/s.Navasakthi Townships Developers Private Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
K.I.Manirathinem
No.216, Anugraha Satellite Township,
ECR Periyakattupalayam,
Cuddalore District. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Deputy Collector (Revenue) South,
Office of Deputy Collector,
Villianur, Pondicherry.
2.The District Registrar,
Puducherry.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Registration Department,
Bahour, Puducherry. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ or direction in the nature of writ, by calling for the records leading to the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 23.09.2014 vide No.002/DCRS/LA/BR/2014 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Premauxilianraj
For Respondents : Mr.T.Murugesan
Government Pleader
Mr.A.Tamilvanan
Government Advocate (P)
- - -
CAV on 12/11 /2014 and pronounced on /11/2014
O R D E R
The short facts of the case are as follows:-
The petitioner submits that the petitioner's company is a registered company and registered under the Companies Act, involved in the business of developing house sites, buildings, residential individual houses, apartments etc., in the course of their business. The petitioner's company purchased the property bearing R.S.No.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5, 116/A, 106/3, 108/4, 110/1, 118/1, 110/2, 111, 108/3, 108/5, 118/4, 118/2, 100/5 at Pillayar Kuppam Revenue Village, Bahour Commune Panchayat, Puducherry. The said lands were purchased from the Pondicherry Paper Mills Limited by registered sale deeds dated 10.09.2009 and 28.12.2009. In the said site, they had obtained building permit for the housing lay out for constructing two storied individual houses comprising of 473 plots vide permit No.PPA/1410/35/Z(SB/2)/2010, dated 13.07.2010. The petitioner has carried out his construction activities strictly in accordance with the approved planning permit.
2. The petitioner further submits that out of the said lands in S.Nos.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5 and 116, which they purchased from Pondicherry Paper Limited where they are putting up construction is now claimed to be the Government land by means of the impugned order dated 23.09.2014 and also called upon the first and second respondents to freeze the GLR value of the said lands as the lands are acquired under the Acquisition Act. He submits that the said lands were acquired for the purpose of putting up of industry i.e., paper mill. The lands were acquired at the costs of Pondicherry Paper Mills as per the Land Acquisition Act and the paper mill functioned from 1978 to 2001 and after that the Mill could not make progress in its business and it decided to dispose of its assets and properties and the petitioner got the lands vide registered sale deed and General Power of Attorney in respect of S.No.108/1 and 116/A. The fact that the industry stopped its function and disposed of the properties were made known to the Government of Puducherry and as per the guidelines value, the sale was effected. The petitioner further submits that as per the agreement entered under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act, if the Government decides not to exercise the power of resuming lands, it shall inform the company accordingly and the company was at liberty to dispose of the lands. The petitioner further submits that the petitioner's vendor, the Pondicherry Papers Limited has informed Government before disposing the lands and at that time there was no resistance / objection for transferring the lands. Accordingly, they purchased S.Nos.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4 and 112/5 by registered sale deed dated 28.12.2009 and in respect of S.Nos.108/1 and 116/4 general power of attorney was executed in favour of the petitioner for developing the same into house sites.
3. The petitioner further submits that subsequent to the purchase of the properties, the petitioner got planning permission for formation of lay out and for constructing 473 individual houses. While getting planning permission, statutory clearance from Public Works Department (PWD), Puducherry, State Land User Board, Puducherry, State Land User Board, Puducherry, State Ground Water Unit and Soil Conservation, Puducherry and the Puducherry Electricity Department were obtained. The petitioner further submits that the aforesaid clearances were obtained before commencing their project in the year 2010-2011. The various clearances aforementioned, were also obtained from the State Land User Board, which is a competent board to give clearances regarding usage and nature of the holdings of the property and none of the statutory authorities have raised any objections or queries regarding the usage of the land at that time. The petitioner further submits that when such is the fact and when the petitioner was about to complete the project, the present impugned order was passed without any legal sanction. The first respondent has no authority to issue such a notice and once the Government has initially decided not to exercise its right to resume the lands, the first respondent cannot now claim some alleged right over the property. The petitioner has invested several crores of rupees in the said project, by availing a term loan from State Bank of India, Puducherry to the tune of Rs.28 Crores and at this stage, the first respondent has arbitrarily exceeded his jurisdiction and passed the impugned order claiming the lands as the one belonging to the Government of Puducherry. The petitioner further submits that rather than their investments over the project, the purchasers have also paid their hard earned money towards the consideration for the purchase of the houses. Out of the constructed houses, 339 have been registered and possession has been handed over to the respective purchasers and the sale statistics is annexed with. This being so, the impugned order was passed by the first respondent without ascertaining any of the factual particulars.
4. The petitioner additionally added that earlier the Puducherry Planning Authority has issued demolition notice on 16.06.2014 stating that 250 houses are being constructed with deviations from the approved plan and as such, the petitioner's act is in contravention to the Puducherry Building Bye Laws and Zoning Regulations 2012, and it is complained that the petitioner has constructed a shed over the area shown for park in the lay out and over the irrigation canal land passing through the lay out. The petitioner further submits that citing the above defects, explanation was called for within a weeks time vide letter dated 16.06.2014, failing which, it was stated that further action under the Puducherry building Bye-laws and Zoning Regulations 2012 and Puducherry Town and Country Planning Act 1969, would be taken. The petitioner further submits that the said notice was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.22616 of 2014 and this Court was pleased to grant order of interim stay of further proceedings pursuant to the notice of demolition issued by the first respondent. Subsequently, when they obtained stay of the demolition notice, the Pondicherry Planning Authority in order to restrain the building operations has adopted another mode to stop the project and issued order dated 30.07.2014 and has called upon the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.32,83,200/- towards the cess amount and a request was made to the Sub Registrar not to entertain any of the petitioner's document for registration. Pursuant to the communication, the petitioner paid the cess amount.
5. The petitioner further submits that against the order dated 30.07.2014, wherein, the petitioner's documents were sought to be not entertained, they filed a writ petition in W.P.No.26507 of 2014 and interim stay of the part referred in the impugned order, where the Sub Registrar has been restrained from registering any plot, was granted. The present impugned order was passed only with an intention to see that the project is not finalized at any means. The back ground facts leading to series of orders by various authorities would go to show that the respondents want to see that somehow or the other the project is stalled. Hence, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition to set-aside the impugned order dated 23.09.2014.
6. The first respondent has filed a counter statement and resisted the above writ petition. The respondent submits that the then Under Secretary to Government (Revenue Department), vide letter dated 27.10.1975 forwarded it to the then Sub Collector, Pondicherry with the list of lands required to be acquired and requested to arrange inspection of the lease and arrange to send a report under Rule 4 of Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules , 1963. Subsequently, the then Deputy Collector (Revenue) vide letter dated 26.12.1975 addressed to the Director, the Pondicherry Papers Ltd., had asked the following details for submitting a report to the Government under Rule 4 of the Land Acquisition Company Rules 1963:-
"a. That the company has made its best endeavour to find out suitable lands in the locality for the purpose of acquisition b. That the company has made all reasonable efforts to get such land by negotiation with the persons interested therein, on payment of reasonable price and that such efforts have failed c. That the area of the lands proposed to be acquired was not excessive d. That the company was not in a position to utilize the lands expeditiously.
e. That the company has offered to pay the cost of acquisition."
and in response, the Pondicherry Papers Ltd., vide letter dated 05.01.1976 replied as given below:-
"a) The total minimum requirement of land from our paper mill project is 25 hectares. Normally Paper mills of the size proposed by us using such bulky raw material as rice straw requires upto 40 Hectares of land which would also take care of the normal expansion. We are trying to start out paper mill with the bare minimum requirements where we do not have any scope of expansion, unless sufficient land is made available by the Government.
b) After much difficulty, we have been able to negotiate and purchased (2-35-80 + 7-89-10) hectares of land at a total cost of Rs.1,64,215/-. Though we have tried our best to offer the same price for lands adjacent to ours, the land owners are not willing to part with the land except by a very high price which is not justified by the present circumstances. If we are forced to purchase land at this high price, it would cause a heavy burden on the project cost.
c) All over the country land for such huge projects are made available by the concerned State Governments on nominal lease run for 99 years and over. This is particularly so when the project is being located in a backward region which will ultimately benefit the community around the area. We require minimum of 10 Hectares of land additional and adjoining the land already purchased by us. We have already sent a location map showing the survey numbers and the land required by us and would request you to institute proceedings for acquisition of the same at the earliest possible opportunity." They have also stated that they are willing to pay the necessary charges.
7. The respondent further submits that the then Deputy Collector, inspected the lands on 19.02.1976 proposed for acquisition and opined that it might not be possible to invoke urgency clause, as requested by the company since there are structures on the lands under acquisition and that Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act might be submitted to the Government. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was approved vide G.O.Ms.No.57, dated 02.04.1976. The respondent further submits that in response to the 4(1) notification, the landowners vide letters dated 19.05.1976 have requested to stop the acquisition proceedings in their land, as they are small scale farmers or else compensate their loss of land by offering them equal lands, by way of acquisition from big landlords. The respondent further submits that the 5A enquiry was fixed on 17.07.1976. He further submits that the then Deputy Collector (Rev), vide letter dated 20.09.1976 has sent the draft declaration under Section 6, with the following opinion with regard to the objections obtained from the landowners / interested persons:-
"The proposed acquisition is for setting up a Paper Mill which will be a land mark in the improvement of industrial belt in Pondicherry region. The Company has already purchased lands from big landlords and the proposed lands are contiguous to it. Hence, they are badly required for the proposed industry. The objection may therefore be overruled in the larger interest of the public."
The respondent further submits that the Deputy Collector (Rev) in the said letter, has also stated that as the acquisition proposals relate to a company, an agreement vide Part VII under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act has to be executed by the company. The part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, is reproduced below:-
ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR COMPANIES "38-A Industrial concern to be deemed company for certain purpose:-
An industrial concern ordinarily employing not less than one hundred workmen owned by an individual or by an association of individuals and not being a company, desiring to acquire land for the erection of dwelling-houses for workmen employed by the concern or for the provision of amenities directly connected therewith shall, so far as concerns the acquisition of such land, be deemed to be a company for the purpose of this part, and the references to company in Secs.4, 5-A, 6, 7 and 50 shall be interpreted as references also to such concern.
39. Previous consent of appropriate Government and execution of agreement necessary:-
The provisions of Secs.6 to 16 both inclusive and Secs.18 to 37 both inclusive shall not be put in force in order to acquire land for any company under this Part unless with the previous consent of the appropriate Government nor unless the company shall have executed the agreement hereinafter mentioned.
40. Previous inquiry:-
(1) Such consent shall not be given unless the appropriate Government be satisfied, either on the report of the Collector under Sec.5-A, sub-Section (2) or by an inquiry held as hereinafter provided, -
(a) That the purpose of acquisition is to obtain land for the erection of dwelling-houses for workmen employed by the company or for the provisions of amenities directly connected therewith, or (aa) That such acquisition is needed for the construction of some building or work of a company which is engaged or is taking steps for engaging itself in any industry or work which is for a public purpose, or
(b) That such acquisition is needed for the construction of some work, and that such work is likely to prove useful to the public.
(2) Such enquiry shall be held such officer and at such time and place as the appropriate Government shall appoint.
(3) Such officer may summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses and compel the production of documents by the some means and, as far as possible, in the same manner as is provided by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (5 of 1908) in the case of civil Court.
41. Agreement with appropriate Government:
If the appropriate Government is satisfied after considering the report, if any, of the Collector under Sec.5-A, Sub-Section(2), or on the report of the officer making an inquiry under Section 40 that the proposed acquisition is for any of the purposes referred to in Cl.(a) or Cl.(aa) or Cl.(b) of Sub-Section (1) of Sec.40, it shall require the company to enter into an agreement with the appropriate Government, providing to the satisfaction of the appropriate Government for the following matters, namely:
1) The payment to the appropriate Government of the cost of the acquisition;
2) The transfer, on such payment, of the land to the company;
3) The terms on which the land shall be held by the company;
4) Where the acquisition is for the purpose of erecting dwelling-houses or the provision of amenities connected therewith, the time within which, the conditions on which and the manner in which the dwelling-houses or amenities shall be erected or provided.
4-A) Where the acquisition is for the construction of any building or work of a company which is engaged or is taking steps for engaging itself in any industry or work which is for a public purpose the time within which, and the conditions on which, the building or work shall be constructed or executed: And
5) Where the acquisition is for the construction of any other work, the time within which and the conditions on which the work shall be executed and maintained, and the terms on which the public shall be entitled to use the work.
42. Publication of agreement:- Every such agreement shall, as soon as may be after its execution, be published in the official gazette, and shall be thereupon so far as regards the terms on which the public shall be entitled to use the work have the same effect as if it had formed part of his Act.
43. Sections 39 to 42 not to apply where Government bound by agreement to provide land for companies:-
The provisions of Sections 39 to 42 both inclusive, shall not apply, and the corresponding sections of the Land Acquisition Act, 1870 10 of 1870), shall be deemed never to have applied to the acquisition of land for any railway or other company, for the purpose of which under any agreement with the company, the Secretary of State for India in Council, the Secretary of State the Central Government or any State Government is or was bound to provide land.
44. How agreement with railway company may be proved:-
In the case of the acquisition of land for the purposes of a railway company, the existence of such an agreement as is mentioned in Sec. 43 may be proved by the production of a printed copy thereof purporting to be printed by order of Government.
44-A. Restriction of transfer, etc.:- No company for which any land is acquired under this part shall be entitled to transfer the said land or any part thereof by sale, mortgage, lease or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government.
44-B. Land not be acquired under this Part except for certain purpose for private companies other than Government Companies:-
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no land shall be acquired under this Part, except for the purpose mentioned in Cl.(a) of Sub-Section (1) of Sec. 40, for a private company which is not a Government Company."
8. The respondent further submits that as the lands were notified for setting up of a Paper Mill and as it was decided about the amount of compensation paid by the Pondicherry Paper Ltd., under Part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, there was the necessity to execute an agreement under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act. Accordingly, the Agreement was executed by the Secretary (Revenue) - cum - Collector, Pondicherry and Pondicherry Papers Mills Ltd., represented by Thiru.Gnanagiriganesan, Director, The Pondicherry Paper Mills Ltd., The terms of agreement are as follows:-
"The Company shall pay to the Government of Pondicherry before the said land is transferred to the company, the cost of the land as settled by the Collector or if reference is made to the Court by the final Court of Appeal and all costs of acquisition inclusive of all payments and allowances in respect thereof payable under the said act and all Courts costs and Pleaders fees etc. incurred by the said Government in defending the reference if any, made to the Court as aforesaid and an appeal or appeals filed in connection therewith and all costs, Pleaders fees etc. payable or paid by the said Government to the claimant in the said matters. The said Government shall not be bound to give possession of the land until all the said moneys have been paid and may withdraw from the acquisition and in case of withdrawal the company shall be liable to indemnify the said Government against all expenses incurred and damage sustained as the result of anything done by them in the matter of acquisition till the date of withdrawal.
Upon such payment by the company, the Government of Pondicherry shall execute and do all such acts, deeds, matters and things as may be necessary or proper for effectively vesting the said land in the company and giving the company an absolute title thereto subject the payment of an assessment or ground rent as hereinafter provided.
The terms upon which the said land shall be held by the Company are:-
a) That the land shall be used for setting up of a paper mill industry;
b) That the company shall pay to the Government of Pondicherry annually the appropriate assessment or ground rent, as the case may be on the land which shall be liable to revision at any general revisions of the Land Revenue Settlement.
c) That in the event of the company being wound up or in the even of failure on the part of the company to carryout the terms, agreement that is to say the land shall be liable to be resumed and taken back by the said Government on repayment to the Company of the amount of the award as finally settled less the 15% awarded for compulsory acquisition or the estimated market value of the land at the time of resumption, whichever shall be less and if there are any buildings on the land, the said Government may at their option either purchase the buildings on payment of their estimated value at the time, or direct the company to remove the buildings at its own cost within such time as may be allowed by the said Government.
d) That in the event of voluntary relinquishment of the land by the company as not required for the purpose for which it was acquired, the Government may resume the land, if it is required for a public purpose or if they consider that it should be returned to the original owner. If the Government decide not to exercise this power and inform the company accordingly the later may dispose of the land in any manner it likes. In the even of the resumption of the land under this condition, the compensation payable to the company shall be value of the land at the time of acquisition (less than 15 percent awarded for compulsory acquisition) or its value at the time of resumption whichever may be less together with the value of the buildings and other improvements at the time of resumption. It there are buildings on the land, which the Government do not require, the company shall remove them at its cost.
e) That the Government shall have the right to resume the land, if the company does not gives the land for the purpose for which it was acquired within a period of one year or for such further extended period as may be permitted by the Government to be reckoned from the date on which the company was placed in possession of the land."
He further submits the details of property acquired which are as follows:-
Revenue Village : Pillaiyarkuppam Sub Taluk : Bahour Dry/ Wet Re-survey No. Extent (H-A-Ca.) Dry 108/1 0-66-50 Dry 112/1 0-61-50 Dry 112/2 0-48-00 Dry 112/3 0-56-50 Dry 112/4 0-28-00 Dry 112/5 0-28-00 Dry 116 A 2-72-50 Total 5-60-50
9. The respondent further submits that the Declaration under Section 6 and the Form of Agreement under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act, was published vide G.O.Ms.No.55, dated 05.03.1977 and urgency provision was invoked at this stage and hence, the Deputy Collector (Revenue), vide Memo dated 27.09.1977 has directed the Deputy Tahsildar to take possession of the lands and hand them over to the representatives of the Pondicherry Paper Mills. Accordingly, the Deputy Tahsildar(Bahour), vide letter dated 21.10.1977 has stated that the lands acquired for establishment of Paper Mills have been handed over to the representative of the Paper Mill Ltd., on 17.10.1977 at 3 p.m., Subsequently, the Award was passed vide Award No.18/78 dated 15.06.1978. The Pondicherry Papers Ltd., paid the amount of Rs.1,64,539.70 vide cheque dated 10.05.78. The respondent further submits that after handing over of the land and with the self acquired land, the Pondicherry Paper Mills Ltd., have set-up the Paper Mills. In connection with the setting up of the said Mill, M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., had then requested the then Land Acquisition Officer vide letter dated 24.11.1981 to accord necessary sanction of the Government under Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, to create a joint equitable mortgage in favour of the Central financial Institutions, viz., ICICI, IFCI, IDBI, LIC, UTI and SBI as security for the term loans sanctioned. On submitting the proposal by the then Deputy Collector on 15.12.1981, the Deputy Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Government of Pondicherry had communicated the permission of the Government of Pondicherry under Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act for mortgaging the acquired land, vide letter No.14613/81/B, dated 09.02.1982.
10. The respondent further submits that the erstwhile Pondicherry Paper Mill premises is situated in R.S.No.108 full, 110 full, 111 full, 112 full, 118 full, 106 part and 116 part of Pillaiyarkuppam Revenue Village of Bahour Taluk, Puducherry. Among the above said lands, the lands acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1899 are R.S.Nos.108/1, 112/1 to 5 and 116 A of Pillaiyarkuppam Revenue Village, Bahour Taluk, Puducherry measuring to a total extent of 05-60-50 Ha. Section 44(a) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 specifically restricts any transfer of lands acquired by the Government for any company. This Section provides that no company, for which any land is acquired under this part, shall be entitled to transfer the said lands or any part there of by sale, mortgage, lease or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government and in the instant case, the appropriate Government is Government of Puducherry. The respondent further submits that so long as any permission has not been accorded by the Government of Puducherry to the erstwhile company, viz., M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited transfer, is ab-initio null and void and any transfer made by the erstwhile M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., is against the law and it is invalid. Therefore, any claim made by the petitioner relating to purchase of land is not valid in law and therefore, the petitioner does not have any right to claim the said land. The respondent further submits that moreover, as per Section 100 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 read with Section 6 of the Central Clauses Act, the same situation continues to prevail even now and any transfer of land acquired for the purpose of Government under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act without the permission of the Government is not permissible. Relating to the building plan approval, the petitioner has not impleaded the competent officers/ authority in this writ petition, viz., Puducherry Planning Authority and Town and Country Planning Department of the Government of Puducherry and without impleading them it may not be fair on the part of the petitioner to make any claim.
11. The respondent further submits that the petitioner's vendor viz., M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, represented by one of its Director, C.Subha Singh having its Registered Office at No.2, First Floor, Third cross Street, Shanthi Nagar, Puducherry - 11, contrary to the conditions of agreement executed between the Government of Puducherry and M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., and also contrary to the legal provisions namely Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, has sold / authorized to sell the land to the petitioner, which is illegal and they should be impleaded for their illegal acts of sale without permission of the Government and in violation of the terms of agreement. They are the actual purchaser of the land from the Land Acquisition Authority and are liable equally with the petitioner to pay the compensation to the Government and any third party interest holders. The respondent further submits that one Thiru.Ramaputhiran S/o.Kandasamy No.11, Old Post Office Street, Kirumampakkam Post, Puducherry, from whom part of land was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for setting up the said M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited and from M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd and from whom the petitioner has alleged to have purchased the lands, has filed O.S.No.138 of 2013 in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Puducherry, praying the Court that the land acquired from Thiru.Ramaputhiran be returned back to him as there is no paper mill now which was the purpose for which it was acquired from him. When there is a specific case pending against this issue before the III Additional District Judge, Puducherry and the petitioner M/s.Navasakthi Townships Developers Private Limited and the Mill are the defendants therein, the petitioner has suppressed the same in this affidavit and hence, the said Thiru.Ramaputhiran, with his legal-heirs must also be impleaded as respondents in this writ petition. Further, the acquired lands by the Government under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act has been claimed now and therefore, the Union of India ought to have been also impleaded as respondent, but the petitioner has omitted to implead them.
12. The respondent further submits that the alleged purchase of lands in respect of R.S.Nos.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5 and 116 from M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited is not valid in law in view of Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, read with conditions of agreement executed between the Government of Puducherry and the erstwhile M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited published vide Gazette No.81 bis dated 07.03.1977 (Extraordinary), and also read with Section 100 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Though the lands acquired by the M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited, as long as the said Company used the said land for the said purpose for which it was acquired, the respondent has not intervened. As the petitioner viz, M/s.Navasakthi Townships Developers Private Limited and Pondicherry Papers Limited have violated the conditions of agreement and also violated the statutory provisions of Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act and Section 100 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the respondent is forced to intervene in the interest of the public. The petitioner, viz., M/s.Navasakthi Townships Developers Private Limited, have divided the lands into plots and published it in the newspaper for selling the same, thereby, inviting the public to purchase the lands which will create multiplicity of litigations as the petitioner himself does not have the legal right to sell the lands. Selling Government acquired lands by the petitioner will be against public interest and will lead to complications. In order to avoid such sale of lands, the first respondent has frozen the GLR (Guide Line Register) values of the acquired lands only vide letter No.002/DCRS/LA/B4/2014, dated 23.09.2014 by deleting the GLR (Guide Line Register) values and treated as freezed with the remarks "Acquired lands under Land Acquisition". The respondent further submits that as per Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, "Where, by any (Central Act) or Regulations, a power to (issue notifications) orders, rules, or bye-laws is conferred, then that power includes a power, exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like sanction and condition (if any), to add to, amend, vary or rescind any (notifications) orders, rules or by-law so (issued)"
Hence, the first respondent who issued the GLR (Guide Line Register) values has also the power to rescind or amend the same and the GLR values for the year 2014-15 has been made by the Deputy Collector (Revenue) South and as such, it has been rescinded vide letter dated 23.09.2014, in terms of the General Clauses Act. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has not mentioned the entire conditions of agreement executed under Section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act. Condition (c) of the agreement which states:-
"that in the event of the company being wound up or in the event of failure on the part of the company to carry the terms, agreement that is to say the land shall be liable to be resumed and taken back by the said Government on repayment to the company of the amount of the award as finally settled less the 15% awarded for compulsory acquisition or the estimated market value of the land at the time of resumption, whichever shall be less and if there are any buildings on the land, the said Government may at their option either purchase the buildings on payment of their estimated value at the time, or direct the company to remove the buildings at its own cost within such time as may be allowed by the Government."
M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., has been wound up and as per the agreement the Government have every right to resume the lands and take back the same and therefore, the petitioner does not have legal right to claim the said lands. As per the condition, the M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited is entitled only to get back the money which they paid to the Government for acquiring the lands but not the lands as such. The petitioner's vendor, viz., The Pondicherry Papers Ltd., has submitted a letter dated 03.02.2009 to the then district Collector, Puducherry, seeking No Objection Certificate to sell the Governments immovable properties to third party for residential purpose, but No Objection Certificate was not granted by the Government or Collector as on date and without such permission, the transfer of lands is void ab initio.
13. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has mentioned about the various clearances from different Departments like Public Works Department, Agriculture Department, Electricity Department, etc., but he has not impleaded them as respondents. The necessary parties have not been impleaded in this writ petition. In the I.D. Note dated 12.09.2014 of the Under Secretary to Government, Confidential and Cabinet Department, Chief Vigilance Office received through the Special Officer, Department of Revenue & Disaster Management, the District Collector was asked to state whether any action has been initiated to retrieve the Government land as per the provisions of any agreement and hence, a report has been again submitted to the Government and it is under consideration. The respondent further submits that the Government has not exercised its right to resume the lands. The petitioner may very well use his loan for the lands bought from M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited except those lands which were acquired by the Government from the Private Parties for setting up of M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited and any development in such acquired lands is contrary to the purpose for which it was acquired and it requires prior sanction of the Government under Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Section 100 and 114 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The petitioner or the M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited has at the most might have approached for legal remedy for the letter dated 03.02.2009, but he cannot have any right to sell the lands contrary to the conditions of agreement and law. Therefore to avoid further transaction and to avoid multiplicity of litigation, the GLR (Guide Line Register) value is frozen. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has no legal right to sell the acquired lands without permission of the Government and his purchase itself was against the law and therefore, further transaction is also against the law. The petitioner himself has stated that some of the purchasers have bought lands in their Housing layout. In order to prevent the innocent purchasers from purchasing further the Government acquired lands, contrary to the conditions of the agreement, the GLR (Guide Line Register) values has been frozen. As on date, there are many vacant plots/ lands in the petitioner's housing layout. The respondent requests the Court to restrain the petitioner from selling any further plots from the acquired lands and further that in lieu of already sold plots, the petitioner be directed to compensate to the purchasers and restore the lands / plots vacant back to Government as in the agreement. The respondent further submits that Puducherry Planning Authority and Town and Country Planning Department should also be impleaded. The GLR (Guide Line Register) values have been frozen, only in respect of the acquired lands under provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, but not for the entire lands of erstwhile M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited. The respondent further submits that consequent on the amendment of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as extended to this Union Territory of Puducherry as per Section 47(A), the Stamp duty is leviable under market value of the property instead of on the value of the consideration noted in the document and for the said purpose GLRs (Guide Line Registers) are prepared now for every financial year. The guideline register containing the market value of lands in each village survey number wise is supplied to Registrar's Office for verifying whether the market value set-forth in the document presented for the Registration represents the true market value of the property. The Guide Line Register is also employed by the Collector under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for assessment of value of properties covered by documents referred by registering offices under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. As per Section 47A of the above Act, if the registering authority has reason to believe that the market value of the property conveyed has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may after registering such instrument, refer the same to the Collector for the determination of the market value and proper duty paid thereon. Under this provision, a reference will be made to the concerned Deputy Collectors (Revenue), who have been appointed to perform all the functions of Collector under the Indian Stamp Act vide notification published in the Gazette No.33, dated 18.08.1970. In order that the Sub Registrars may resort to a reference to the collector only in deserving cases, it was decided to prepare and furnish to the Sub Registrars certain guidelines with reference to which they would be in a position to find out whether the valuation made in a particular document is correct. And thus the Guide Line Registers (GLRs) are prepared every year by the respective Deputy Collectors who are vested with powers of the Collector under Indian Stamp Act, 1899. As per Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, the power to create includes the power to cancel and therefore, the impugned order is valid in law.
14. The respondent further submits that as per the conditions of agreement executed between the petitioner's vendor viz., M/s.Pondicherry Papers Ltd., read with Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act and Section 100 and 114 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the petitioner has no legal right to possess the land contrary to the purpose for which it was acquired without prior permission of the Government. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has already started violating the law of the land by selling the land without prior permission of the Government and to avoid further multiplicity of litigation and to safeguard the innocent public from purchasing, the GLR (Guide Line Register) value has been frozen. The respondent further submits that GLR values has been frozen as per Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has not impleaded necessary parties and without impleading the same, the petitioner is barred to agitate the same. The respondent further submits that the GLR values are made by the Deputy Collector (Revenue) and prior approval to amend is not necessary in view of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. Moreover, through the Note dated 05.08.2010 of Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, the District Collector has stated that the above acquired lands are now deemed to be Government lands and the sale effected by the company is illegal and void and this type of sale has been made to enter as an objection in the Puducherry Planning Authority and given effect to and therefore, the freezing of GLR values is in larger public interest to avoid purchase of Government lands by innocents. The respondent further submits that the Government has not decided to exercise its right to resume the land. A proposal has already been submitted by the first respondent to the Collector and it is under the consideration of the Government. The respondent further submits that the freezing of GLR has been issued as per the powers in the General Clauses Act and in public interest. The respondent further submits that the petitioner has larger extent of land including the acquired land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and the present freezing of GLR value relates to only the acquired lands under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and it is so frozen to avoid further multiplicity of litigations and to avoid purchase by innocent public. The respondent further submits that contrary to the conditions of the agreement, and Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Section 100 and 114 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the petitioner is trying to sell the part of lands acquired by the Government for the setting up of Paper Mills without the permission of the Government. As any kind of transaction without the permission of the Government is barred by Law, in order to avoid purchase by innocents and to safeguard the interest of the Government and also in Public interest, the GLR value has been frozen in respect of only the acquired lands viz, R.S.No.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5 and 116 pt of Pillaiyarkuppam Revenue Village of Bahour Taluk. The respondent further submits that it is purely in public interest and to safeguard the interest of the Government and in accordance with Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the GLR values has been frozen.
15. The respondent further submits that because of the grant of stay by this Court, there is every likelihood that the portion of lands in which the Government is interested may be sold and innocent purchasers may buy the same. Hence, the respondent prays this Court to vacate the stay in the interest of public. By vacating the stay granted by the Court, the petitioner is not at a loss due to the fact that the petitioner has not got any valid permission from the Management to transfer the said acquired lands. As per the agreement, the M/s.Pondihcerry Papers Ltd., is entitled utmost to the amount of Rs.1,39,858.75/- after deduction of Rs.24,680.95/- equivalent to 15% from the compensation of Rs.1,64,539.70/- paid by the company for the acquisition, as provided in the agreement, but because of such illegal transfers, the petitioner is getting Crores of Rupees in the sale of lands which is barred by law. The respondent further requests this Court to direct the petitioner to submit the details of sale proceedings and direct the petitioner to compensate the plot purchasers who are likely to be affected from the purchase of Government acquired lands. As per the condition of agreement, the petitioner should be directed to return back the vacant portion of acquired lands back to the Government. The petitioner's vendor viz., M/s.Pondicherry Papers Limited had given a letter to sell the land in 2009. But he has executed the sale deed without waiting for the permission of the Government on 20.12.2009 vide Document No.4065/2009 of Sub Registry, Bahour which is in clear violation of law. The urgency shown by the petitioner and the petitioner's vendor in disposing the Government interested land against the provisions of law shows the ulterior motive of the petitioner and the petitioner's vendors to make illegal money and create loss to the Government. As per the terms of agreement and also as per the provision of the Land Acquisition Act as well as the Land Acquisition (Company) Rues, 1963, the company has no right to dispose property without the previous sanction of the Government.
16. The respondent further submits that Section 44-A is again reproduced as follows:-
"Restriction on transfer, etc.,:- No company for which any land is acquired under this part shall be entitled to transfer the said land or any part thereof by sale, mortgage, lease or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government."
Further, Rule 5 and 8 of the Land Acquisition Company Rules provided as follows:-
"Rule 5: Matters to be provided in the agreement under Section 41:(1) The terms of the agreement referred to in Section 41 of the Act shall include the following matters, namely:-
(i) that the company shall not, except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government, use the land for any purpose other than that for which it was acquired.
Rule 8: Conditions under which sanction may be given for transfer of land. - Where a company for which land has been acquired under the Act applies for the previous sanction of the appropriate Government for the transfer of that land or any part thereof by sale, gift, lease or otherwise, no such sanction shall be given unless.
(i) the proposed transfer of land along with dwelling houses, amenities, building of work, if any, is to some other company or where the company is co-operative society, such transfer is to any or all of its members, or
(ii) where the land has been acquired solely for the erection of dwelling houses for workmen employed by the company, the proposed transferred of the land along with dwelling houses, if any, is to such workmen or their dependent heirs.
Provided that before giving any such sanction, the appropriate Government shall consult the committee."
The respondent further added that in view of the above provisions, the company had no right or locus-standi to dispose the land to the third parties, without prior permission of Government. The company could not transfer the said land or any part thereof by sale, mortgage lease or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government as per Section 44 A and conditions of agreement. Therefore, the company has in utter violation of all legal provisions sold the land to a property developer. Therefore, the transfer of land by the company is not only in violation of the terms of agreement with the Government but also in violation of the legal provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act and Land Acquisition Company Rules 1963. Moreover, one of the land owners Thiru.Ramaputhiran had already filed a suit in Civil Court claiming return back of the lands to him and the suit is still pending in civil Court and the petitioner is not permitted to sell the land. Further, the Central Bureau of Investigation has registered a criminal case against the petitioner and his vendor along with some Government officials relating to the transfer of the above said acquired land. The case is under investigation by the CBI. If the petitioner is permitted to sell the property further it will complicate the issue and many more innocent purchasers will be in trouble. Hence, the respondent requests the Court to vacate the stay and uphold the order of the first respondent freezing the GLR value in the public interest and to uphold the law. Therefore, the respondent entreats the Court to dismiss the above writ petition.
17. The highly competent counsel Mr.S.Premauxilianraj appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner Company has been registered under the Companies Act. It is involved in the building construction field. During the Company's business, they had purchased property at R.S.No.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5, 116/A, 106/3, 108/4, 110/1, 118/1, 110/2, 111, 108/3, 108/5, 118/4, 118/2, 100/5 situated at Pillaiyar Kuppam Revenue Village, Bahour Commune Panchayat, Puducherry. The said lands were purchased from the Pondicherry Paper Mills Limited by registered sale deeds dated 10.09.2009 and 28.12.2009 which has been registered on the file of third respondent herein. Further, the petitioner's company had obtained building permit for the housing lay out and for constructing two storied individual houses comprising of 473 plots as per the planning permit granted by the authority dated 13.07.2010. Accordingly, the petitioner has carried out his construction works strictly in accordance with the approved planning permit. The highly competent counsel further submits that out of the said lands S.Nos.108/1, 112/1, 112/2, 112/3, 112/4, 112/5 and 116, which they have purchased from Pondicherry Paper Limited and where they are putting up construction is now claimed to be the Government land by means of the impugned order dated 23.09.2014 and it also called upon the first and second respondents to freeze the GLR value of the said lands as the lands are acquired under the Acquisition Act. As such, the said lands were acquired for the purpose of putting up the Paper Mill. Further, the lands were acquired at the cost of the Pondicherry Paper Mills as per the Land Acquisition Act. Subsequently, the Paper Mills functioned from 1978 to 2001 and thereafter, the Mill could not progress in its business and it decided to dispose of its assets and properties. Accordingly, the petitioner's company had purchased the subject matter of the property after paying sale consideration as per the Government guideline value.
18. The highly competent counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the Paper Mill Company is at liberty to dispose of the lands since they have paid the cost for acquiring the said land. Further, before alienating the property by the Paper Mill Company to and in favour of the writ petitioner's company, the vendor had informed to the Government regarding this sale transaction. However, the Government had not raised any objection for selling the said land. Therefore, the petitioner has purchased the said property by way of a registered sale deed. On the strength of the said sale deeds, the petitioner has submitted a building plan with relevant documents including necessary taxes paid to the statutory authorities. The Puducherry Planning Authority had scrutinized the relevant document and issued building plan for construction dated 13.07.2010, which is existing. As per the building plan, 473 individual houses were constructed. Further, the Executive Engineer, who is attached to the Irrigation Division, Public Works Department had issued no objection certificate for constructing two storied individual houses at the said site after imposing some conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner's company had carried out the building construction work without violating the conditions imposed by the Public Works Department, Puducherry. Besides, the Hydrology Department had also inspected the petitioner's constructed area and granted permission for constructing and also given direction to obtain separate ground water clearance for meeting out their water requirements before completion of the proposed construction. The order has been passed by the Hydrologist on 03.03.2010 and a copy of it was sent to the Member Secretary, who is attached to the Pondicherry Planning Authority. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached the Electricity Department, Pondicherry Government for power supply to the proposed housing lay out with two storied individual houses and the same was well considered by the Electricity Department via the petitioner's relevant documents with necessary application and also spot inspection was conducted. Then, the Electricity Department has provided power supply to the residential building. The highly competent counsel further submits that the Additional Director of Agriculture had also issued a no objection certificate for constructing the building since the said land is not for agricultural use. The Department had also well scrutinized the title deeds of the petitioner over the said land. Further, for the said building construction, the petitioner's company had obtained housing loan for a sum of Rs.28 Crores, dated 22.05.2012. Before sanctioning the loan amount, the Legal Adviser of the bank had verified the entire documents pertaining to the said land and also inspected the property wherein the construction was being carried out. As such, the petitioner herein possesses marketable title deeds over the said property. Now, the property is binding over the loan which has been granted by the Bank. Further, the Pondicherry Papers Limited has become a sick unit. Therefore, the entire property had been utilized for alternative purpose, especially, for residential purpose, which is more essential to the public. Further, the water and sewerage board had also given no objection certificate and also provided water and drainage connection. The petitioner had sold the 339 newly constructed housing units to the third parties by way of registered sale deeds. As such, the physical possession of the property is being occupied by the new purchasers. The first respondent without conducting a preliminary enquiry after issuing a show cause notice, has passed the impugned order, which is prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, the Bank, new purchasers and as such, the impugned order is not suitable for execution since it violates the principles of natural justice, fundamental rights and personal rights of the parties. Hence, the highly competent counsel appearing for the petitioner entreats the Court to allow the above writ petition.
19. The highly competent Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that on the request of the Pondicherry Papers Limited, the respondent acquired the subject land in order to put up a private company, viz., Pondicherry Papers Limited. On their request, the Government had acquired the said land under an urgency provision, considering there was no paper mill in Pondicherry. Further, the Territory of Pondicherry is a backward area socially and economically and also considering that the Company would render employment for around 300 persons directly and indirectly, but the company was not in a position to utilize the lands expeditiously. However, the property was acquired after issuing 4(1) notification after which 5-A enquiry was conducted. Thereafter, the property was acquired and declaration was published as per Section 6 of the Act. The highly competent counsel appearing for the respondents submits that no company for which any land is acquired under this part shall be entitled to transfer the said land or any part, there of by sale, mortgage, lease or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the appropriate Government. Further, the respondent had imposed a condition that the land shall be used for setting up a paper company. Now, the purpose has been defeated. Therefore, the Company has to surrender the land after removing the Companies assets. The Company and their vendors have made use of Government power for acquiring the private lands for their personal gain. The erstwhile vendors had not obtained any permission from the Government for alienating the said property in favour of the petitioner herein. As such, the sale deeds dated 10.09.2009 and 28.12.2009 are not valid as per law. As such, the subsequent alienation and any mortgage with the bank is also not valid. If any of the Government authorities have granted permission for constructing the building and for providing basic amenities, this is null and void since it was granted with an erroneous view. The view can be invoked after due notice to the petitioner. Further, the petitioner had not impleaded the necessary parties and as such, the writ petition is not maintainable. The original vendor did not have marketable title deeds for alienating the subject land to and in favour of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner did not disclose the entire conditions which had been imposed on the Pondicherry Paper Limited Company. Actually, the Pondicherry Paper Mills Company have no locus-standi for alienating the said landed property since the conditions which had been imposed at the time of assigning the lands have been violated. The petitioner Company and erstwhile vendor have been booked under a criminal case by the Central Bureau of Investigation. This case has been levelled after conducting a preliminary enquiry and after verifying the documents pertaining to the said property. Hence, the the highly competent Government Advocate entreats the court to dismiss the above writ petition.
20. From the above discussion, this Court is of the view that:-
(i) The respondents have acquired the subject land and handed over to the Pondicherry Mill Ltd., on 17.10.1977 after receiving the land value. Thereafter, the said Pondicherry Paper Mills Company has become a sick unit, hence, the vendor had sold the property after a period of 32 years. As such, there is no mala-fide intention for acquiring the land with the help of the Pondicherry Government in order to establish Pondicherry Paper Mills Company. Since the Company has become a sick unit, it was constrained to alienate the property to and in favour of the petitioner herein. The said transaction is admissible since it happened after 32 years.
(ii) If the respondents are still having any civil rights over the said subject lands, they have to set-aside the two sale deeds dated 10.09.2009 and 28.12.2009 through a Court of law, if it is found not sustainable under law and if the respondents are aggrieved by the said alienation. However, the said sale deeds are existing and on the strength of sale deeds, the Statutory Authorities have mutated all the revenue records and other Government records in this process.
(iii) The Pondicherry Planning Authority had approved a building plan to the petitioner herein on 13.07.2010 after scrutinizing the petitioner's documents relating to the subject landed property and that also after a spot inspection. As such, as per the building plan, the petitioner has constructed the said building. The said order of the planning authority is existing.
(iv) The Irrigation Division of the Public Works Department had also issued a No Objection Certificate on 26.03.2010 for constructing two storied individual houses over the said landed property and the same was communicated to the Member Secretary, who is attached to the Pondicherry Planning Authority, who also kept silent after the communication since he had verified the entire records viz., the parent document in the instant case and the order passed by the Deputy Tahsildar and handed over the subject landed property on 17.10.1977 at the time of granting the building plan approval.
(v) Besides, the Hydrology Department had also authorized the petitioner to locate tube wills inside the proposed Housing Layout with two storied individual houses and the said communication was sent to the Member Secretary, Pondicherry Planning Authority. In addition to that the Electricity Department had given service connection in order to provide power supply to the residence of the building after imposing some terms and conditions. Further, the Department of Agriculture had issued a no objection certificate for converting the land for residential purpose. As such, all the Government authorities who are functioning under the Government of Pondicherry, are well aware that the subject lands have been acquired by the first respondent herein and handed over to the Puducherry Paper Mills / erstwhile vendor on 17.10.1977. No legal wing have raised any objections for providing basic amenities to the newly constructed building including planning permission and transfer of title deeds.
(vi) The State Bank of India had granted a sum of Rs.28 Crores as Housing loan for constructing the residential building over the subject land after obtaining legal opinion from the competent legal adviser. As such, the petitioner has duly obtained necessary permission from the Statutory Authorities and he has raised the residential building for construction of 473 individual houses, for which, the petitioner had executed registered sale deeds numbering 339 in favour of the purchasers. At this stage, the subject land property cannot be surrendered to the respondents herein.
(vii) Now, the present purchasers, who are numbering about 339, have civil rights over the said property and they are in occupation of the same. Besides, the cost of the constructed area of the building is more in value than the land cost. Further, the Nationalized Bank (SBI) is having a binding over the said property consisting of land and buildings since they have provided valuable loan for constructing the building. Under the circumstances, the impugned order could not be operated. If the impugned order is permitted to operate, then the new purchasers and the Nationalized Bank who had advanced the loan to the petitioner will be put into irreparable loss.
(viii) This Court's strong view is that, the respondents, after around 32 years, are now claiming the subject land which could only be considered as an afterthought, with no justification as necessary permissions from various competent Government Authorities have been granted for planning and constructing residential houses.
(ix) The impugned order dated 23.09.2014 has been issued by the first respondent herein without conducting preliminary enquiry and after issuing a show cause notice to the parties including the erstwhile vendor viz., Pondicherry Paper Mills and present occupants and as such, the said order is not appropriate for executing any further since it seems to be a final and illogical order which goes against the principles of natural justice.
21. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on either side and on perusing the typed set of papers and the impugned order of the first respondent and this Court's view listed as (i) to (ix) mentioned above, this Court is inclined to allow the above writ petition. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the first respondent vide proceedings No.002/DCRS/LA/BR/2014, dated 23.09.2014 is quashed.
22. In the result, the above writ petition is allowed. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
25/11/2014
Index : Yes/No.
Internet : Yes/No.
r n s
C.S.KARNAN, J.
r n s
To
1.The Deputy Collector (Revenue) South,
Office of Deputy Collector,
Villianur, Pondicherry.
2.The District Registrar,
Puducherry.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Registration Department,
Bahour, Puducherry.
Pre Delivery Order made in
W.P.No.27616 of 2014 &
M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2014
25/11/2014