Madras High Court
Government Film And Tv vs State Rep. By Its Secretary To ... on 19 August, 2014
Author: C.S.Karnan
Bench: C.S.Karnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19 / 08 /2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN W.P.No.No.919 of 2014 and W.P.No.11205 of 2008 & M.P.Nos.1 of 2010 and 4 of 2014 W.P.No.919 of 2014 Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association, Rep. by its Secretary, Mr.Subramaniam, No.11, Amirtham Avenue, Bharathi Street, Velacherry, Chennai-600 042. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.State Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Special Commissioner, (Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization), Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Nandanam, Chennai-600 005. 4.The Thasildar, The Guindy Mambalam Taluk, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 078. 5.M.Baskar 6.S.Menaka 7.V.Mohan 8.R.Vasanthi 9.M.Mageswari 10.R.Kaveri 11.M.Devaraj 12.Samundeeswari 13.Y.Mythily 14.S.Nirmala 15.S.Vijay 16.B.Kannan 17.M.Raja 18.J.Chandru 19.B.Madan Kumar 20.S.Nandakumar 21.D.Subash 22.M.Karvannan 23.S.Shanthi 24.R.Anand 25.N.Veni 26.T.Vettri 27.N.Jayakumar 28.V.Poomagal 29.P.Divya 30.R.Sivakumar 31.R.Moorthy 32.N.Elangovan 33.K.Muniammal 34.V.Prema 35.K.Sarathy 36.S.Sagunthala 37.M.Rajasekar 38.C.Clara 39.S.Aishwarya 40.Thenmozhi 41.G.Karunanithi 42.S.Mahalakshmi 43.Susai Raj ... Respondents (R5 to R43 impleaded as per order dated 30.07.2014 in M.P.No.3 of 2014 in W.P.No.919 of 2014) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the concerned records relating to G.O.Ms.No.549/Revenue (ULC-I(2)) Department, dated 31.12.2013 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to allot the lands to the extent of 6250 sq.metres of lands in S.Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 in Velachery Village, Chennai Urban Agglomeration to petitioner Association. For Petitioner : Mr.R.P.Kabilan, SC For Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1, R2 and R4 Mr.B.Viveka Vanan (TNHB) for R3 Mr.B.Rabu Manohar for R5 to R43 - - - W.P.No.11205 of 2008 S.Ramakrishnan Rep. by Power Agent, Shri.S.Jnaneshwar, No.3/7, Sri Ganesh Apartments, Abhiramapuram, 3rd Street, Chennai - 600 018. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Urban Land Ceiling, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2.The Competent Authority (Urban Land Ceiling) and Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax) T.Nagar, Arcot Road, Chennai - 600 024. 3.The Tahsildar, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai-83. 4.Mr.D.Azhumani 5.Mrs.V.Meenakshi ( R-4 and R-5 residing at No.35A, 2nd Main Road, Lakshimipuram, West Tambaram, Chennai - 600 045) R-4 and R-5 rep. by their Power of Attorney Agent Mr.N.Mani, S/o.K.Natesan, No.35A, 2nd Main Road, Lakshmipuram, West Tambaram, Chennai - 600 045). 6.Mr.N.Mani .... Respondents (R4 to R6 impleaded as per Court order dated 25.03.2009 in M.P.No.2 of 2008 in W.P.No.11205 of 2008) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the entire proceedings initiated by the respondents herein dated 17.12.1981 in R.C.No.4592/81D for acquisition of the surplus lands under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act 24 of 1978, held by the petitioner, in respect of old S.No.316/6B and 316/6F, present Survey No.316/6B2, admeasuring 5570 sq. meters, Velachery Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk as void ab initio, arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional more particularly in the light of the provisions contained in Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Repeal Act 20 of 1999 as the petitioner continues to remain in actual physical possession and consequently direct the third respondent to carry out necessary mutation in the revenue records in favour of the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramesh For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.A.Ramu for R4 to R6 - - - C O M M O N O R D E R
The short facts of the case are as follows:-
The petitioner in W.P.No.919 of 2014, viz., The Secretary, Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association submits that the petitioner-Association is registered under the Societies Registration Act, vide registration No.115/1999. The petitioner's association has around 32 members and the said Association was established for the welfare of the employees in the Tamil Nadu Government Film and TV Institute. The said Association is working towards the welfare of its members and for such welfare, the Association had launched a scheme for providing residential plots to its members on a community house basis. The said Association had made a representation to the Director, Urban Land Society and Regulation on 01.03.2006. In the said representation, the petitioner's Association had requested the Director to provide residential plots to its members under housing scheme. The petitioner's Association had also informed that the lands are situated in Survey Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 of Velacherry Village, a total extent of 4650 sq. mts. and 1600 sq. mts. of vacant lands respectively. The petitioner's Association requested the Director to allow the above said lands for their housing scheme and further informed that the said lands are vested with the Government of Tamil Nadu by virtue of acquisition and the Urban Ceiling Act. The petitioner-Association had also informed that the lands had been under their maintenance and protection from the year 1985.
2. The petitioner-Association further submits that on 22.03.2006, the Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax and Land Ceiling), T.Nagar, had issued a letter Na.Ka.No.219/06 to the petitioner's Association calling upon them to provide the information and other detail with regard to the lands in aforesaid survey numbers and with regard to their request for the allotments for land for the housing scheme. The petitioner's office bearers had duly participated in the said meeting on 10.04.2006 and provided the necessary information with regard to the land. The petitioner-Association additionally added that the Assistant Commissioner in response to their request and pursuant to the meeting on 10.04.2006 had issued a letter dated 07.06.2006 in Na.Ka.No.219/06 to the petitioner's Association. In the said letter, the Assistant Commissioner had mentioned that the proposal for the allotment of the said lands to the petitioner's Association has been forwarded to the second respondent / Special Commissioner, (Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization) for further action and necessary proceedings. The Assistant Commissioner had also mentioned that steps will be taken for obtaining the Government Order in this regard and the same shall be informed to petitioner's Association. It was informed by the office of the second respondent, viz., the Special Commissioner (Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization), had written a letter on 09.08.2007 in Ref.Na.Ka.4160/2000 E2, to the first respondent, viz., the Secretary, who is attached to the Revenue Department. In the said letter, the second respondent had made recommendation for the allotment of the lands in Survey Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2, of Velachery Village to the petitioner's Association. The second respondent / Special Commissioner, (Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization), had further stated that under the prevailing G.O.353, the power with regard to allotment and usage of the lands acquired under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, is vested with the Tamil Nadu Government. It has been further informed that the Government is also empowered to fix a price for the sale of such land under the G.O.140, Revenue Department, dated 20.02.1998, Rule 23(8)(9).
3. The petitioner's Association additionally submits that upon their enquires with the authorities with regard to their request for allotment of land, they were informed that by a letter ref. Ltr.No.20414/Na Nee/1(2)/2006-5, dated 10.10.2007, the Deputy Secretary had written a letter to the second respondent and had enquired as to the status and details with regard to the allotment to the petitioner-Association. It was further informed that the Deputy Secretary had also raised query to the second respondent with regard to cancellation of the order, by which the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the third respondent herein, was vested with the lands in aforesaid survey numbers. The Deputy Secretary had also mentioned in the said letter that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had not utilized or taken any steps with regard to the lands in the survey numbers for a long time. The Deputy Secretary had also raised query, whether the said order can be cancelled and the said lands can be utilized for other purposes including allotting the same to the petitioner's association. The petitioner's Association additionally added that they had made representation to the third respondent, viz., the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, in this regard on 23.08.2004 and further had sent their request by way of letters addressed to the Chief Minister on 09.12.2011 and 10.01.2012 respectively. Whereas, the second respondent informed the petitioner's Association orally that they are facing other legal issues, which needs to be sorted out before initiating proceedings for allotting the land to the petitioner's Association. It has further come to their knowledge that this Court had upheld the validity of the Government action in acquiring the lands under the Urban Land Ceiling Act from erstwhile owners and in the said circumstance the aforesaid lands are presently vested with the Government only.
4. The petitioner's Association further submits that they had taken all efforts to protect and maintain the lands on a firm belief that the said lands would be allotted to them for their housing scheme by the Government of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner's Association had also spent a considerable sum of money towards the protection and maintenance of land. Some miscreants are trying to play fraud amongst the public by forging documents to claim the property and further have also executed sale deeds to third parties for a portion of land on the guise of the forged documents. It is submitted that some people are also trying to encroach into the lands and thereby indulging in illegal acts. In the aforesaid circumstance towards the protection of the lands from the hooligans, the petitioner had filed a complaint before the local police for necessary action. The petitioner had made a representation dated 07.08.2013 to the first respondent transferring the aforesaid facts and had further requested the first respondent to take immediate action for the allotment of the aforesaid land for the petitioner's housing scheme. The petitioner had also informed that the petitioner's request has been kept in abeyance for several years without any constructive development for obtaining the order from the Government of Tamil Nadu. It was also informed that due to inaction on the part of the respondents, the lands are under the threat of encroachment and commission of illegal acts. In such, circumstances, the petitioner-Association has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.23629 of 2013, before this Court, seeking writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner-Association, dated 07.08.2013 with regard to allotment of the lands in Survey Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 of Velachery Village, Chennai, a total extent of 4650 sq. mts and 1600 sq. mts of vacant lands respectively for the petitioner's Association housing scheme. The above writ petition was finally disposed on 21.10.2013 by directing the first respondent to pass an order on the basis of the representation submitted by the petitioner on 07.08.2013 within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. The first respondent, in order to avoid further action passed G.O.Ms.No.549, dated 31.12.2013 after two months rejecting the representation by stating the following reasons:-
"4. In the reference 3rd cited, the Commissioner of Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax has stated that the allotment of land requested by the writ petitioner in Survey Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 measuring the extent of 4650 sq mts. and 1600 sq mts, respectively were already allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board. Moreover, a writ petition in No.11205 of 2008 filed by Tr.S.Ramakrishnan against the acquisition of the land in S.No.316/6B2 at Velachery Village is pending in the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. Hence, the writ petitioner's representation to allot the above mentioned lands to them deserves no consideration."
5. The petitioner's Association further submits that the Government have examined the representation dated 07.08.2013 of the Government film and TV Employees Welfare Association, as per the orders of High Court in W.P.No.23629 of 2013 for allotment of land in S.No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 at Velachery Village for their housing scheme and also to allot the house site to their members. The said lands has already been allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, by the Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.733/Rev., Department, dated 25.05.1985 and also Thiru.S.Ramakrishnan filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 before this Court against the acquisition of his land in S.No.316/6B2 at Velachery Village which is pending before this Court. Hence, the petitioner-Association entreats the Court to call for the records pertaining to G.O.Ms.No.549/Revenue (ULC-I(2)) Department, dated 31.12.2013 passed by the first respondent/Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to allot the lands to the extent of 6250 sq.metres of lands in S.Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 in Velachery Village, Chennai Urban Agglomeration to petitioner-Association.
6. The connected writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 has been filed by one S.Ramakrishnan represented by power agent, Mr.S.Jnaneshwar for declaring proceedings initiated by the first and second respondents viz., Special Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling and Assistant Commissioner, (Urban Land Tax) in respect of the lands held by the petitioner at Survey No.316/6B2, Velacheri Village, Mambalam Guindy Taluk admeasuring an extent of 5570 sq. mts under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1978 as void ab-initio, illegal and unconstitutional and consequently, to direct the third respondent/Tahsildar, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai, to carry out necessary mutations in the revenue records, more particularly in the light of the Repeal Act 20 of 1999. The petitioner further submits that the lands in question were originally allotted to one Mr.K.Subramaniam and his sons as members of the undivided Hindu joint family by and under a registered deed of partition dated 29.09.1958 registered as document No.2630 of 1958 in the office of Sub Registrar, Saidapet. The said K.Subramaniam and his 7 sons partitioned among themselves the property, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition by a deed of partition dated 14.02.1966 registered as Document No.405/1966, on the file of SRO, Saidapet. Under the memorandum of partition executed in 1966, the petitioner herein was allotted an extent of 1.5 acres in Survey No.316/6B. Subsequently, necessary mutations were also carried out in revenue records and separate patta was given to the petitioner and assessment for Urban Land Tax was also made separately.
7. The petitioner / S.Ramakrishnan additionally added that after the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1978, the petitioner filed statements under Section 7(1) of the Act declaring the holdings held by him within the Chennai Urban agglomeration. The lands which are subject matter of the present writ petition were used only for agricultural purposes and the same was duly disclosed by the petitioner herein before the second respondent, viz., the Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Tax. However, without taking into consideration the fact that the lands have been assessed as agricultural lands, the respondents herein declared that an extent of about 5529.75 sq. mts as excess vacant land. After preferring final statement under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1978, the competent authority proceeded in a mechanical manner and by order dated 17.12.1981 in R.C.No.4592/81D, declared an extent of 5529.75 sq mts. of land as excess vacant land. Despite declaration under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, being passed, the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the lands and till date is maintaining the same. In the month of April 2008, the third respondent/Tahsildar, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk Office, accompanied by his officials tried to forcibly take possession of the lands and only thereupon, the petitioner came to know that the entire proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1978 were completed by the first and second respondents. Though, the petitioner had initially filed returns under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, declaring the lands held by him and participated in the enquiry, subsequently the final declaration passed under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1978, was not made available to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner did not know about the culmination of the proceedings.
8. The petitioner/S.Ramakrishnan additionally added that since the petitioner continued to remain in possession and enjoyed the lands in question and since there were no adverse claims, it was assumed by the petitioner that the proceedings were dropped by the respondents subsequently taking into account of the fact that the lands were addressed, as agricultural lands, thereby entitled for exemption under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation Act). However, the respondents, realizing the fact that they have not taken possession sought to forcibly take possession from the petitioner in the month of April 2008. Only thereupon, the petitioner came to know about the factual as well as legal position.
9. The petitioner/S.Ramakrishnan further submits that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling Regulation Act), 1978, are without jurisdiction and consequent to the fact that the petitioner continues to remain in possession, all proceedings initiated under the principal act stands abated. The respondents realizing that they have failed to take possession, in accordance with law under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation Act), 1978 are now seeking to take the possession after the repeal of the Principal Act, which act is without jurisdiction. After the passing of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Repeal Act, 20 of 1999, the respondents cannot, in any manner, continue the proceedings under the Principal Act and all proceedings would abate when the physical possession continues with the land owner / petitioner. Hence, the petitioner entreats the Court to declare the entire acquisition proceedings initiated by the second respondent / Assistant Commissioner Urban Land and Tax as null and void. Hence, the petitioner/S.Ramakrishnan has filed the writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008.
10. The impleading petitioners i.e., 39 persons / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014 have stated that the Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association was initially allotted land measuring an extent of 6690 sq. mts. in Survey No.316/6J, Velacherry Village, Mambalam Guindy Taluk, Chennai-78 by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.918, Revenue Department, dated 19.11.1998. In turn, the said association allotted the land, after plotting it out, to each of the association members, i.e, impleading petitioners herein, measuring an extent of 800 sq. ft. Subsequently, the Government, without issuing any prior notice, unilaterally cancelled the allotment order granted to the said Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association by order of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.48, Revenue Department, dated 30.01.2008.
11. The impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 additionally added that the petitioners had challenged the same in writ petition in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011, before this Court and even though, this Court found that the order cancelling the allotment was wrong and no notice was served on the petitioners by the Government, this Court had held that the petitioners should be given alternative allotments within 4 months in the order dated 31.07.2012. The Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association had issued individual allotment order to the petitioners. In the meanwhile, since the State Government did not obey the conditional order passed by the Hon'ble High Court dated 31.07.2012, the impleading petitioners herein had filed contempt application in Contempt Petition No.544 of 2013 and notice was issued to the respondents / contemnors. The impleading petitioners made a representation on 27.08.2012, before the first respondent, viz., the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, requesting them to allot the land acquired by the Government in S.F.No.316/6B2 situated at No.137, Velacherry Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai as alternative site to the impleading petitioners and the same is still pending consideration.
12. The impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 further submitted that the respondents / State Government has filed a writ appeal against the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011, dated 31.07.2012 and the same is still pending enquiry. Due to the fact that the Government has filed an appeal, the impleading petitioners have also filed an appeal against the said judgment in W.A.No.1110 of 2013. The subject matter of the writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 connected to the subject matter of the alternate site in S.F.No.316/6B2, 137, Velacheri Village claimed by the impleading petitioners, is pending in Writ Appeal No.1110 of 2013 and contempt petition No.544 of 2013. The impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 submit that they had made a representation dated 27.08.2012 before the first respondent requesting them to allot the land acquired by the Government in Survey No.316/6B2 situated at No.137, Velachery Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai-78, as alternate site to these respondents and the same is still pending. These respondents further submit that the State Government has also filed a Writ Appeal against the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011, dated 31.07.2012 and the same is still pending. Due to the fact that the Government has filed an appeal, these respondents have also filed an appeal against the said judgment in W.A.No.1110 of 2013. These respondents further submit that they came to know that the adjacent land, viz., the land in Survey No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 at Velachery Village was acquired by the Director of Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax and the land was handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the purpose of allotting the same to the landless poor. In spite of handing over of the site to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, till today the Tamil Nadu Housing Board did not take possession of the land or pay the amount due to the Government for taking over the said land. These respondents further submit that they came to know that the petitioner in this writ petition, viz., Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association have approached this Court staking claim for allotment of this land to the Association so that the same could be used by the members who are the Government Film and TV Employees. These respondents further submit that the petitioner-Association itself has become defunct. The registration number of the petitioner-Association is 115 of 1999 and an application was filed under the RTI Act requesting whether this Association was still functioning. A reply was received on 01.04.2004 stating that from the year 2000 onwards, the Association has not filed details regarding the statutory provisions under Section 16(3)(b) under the Tamil Nadu Registration Societies Act, 1975. Hence, the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 have requested this Court to allot the lands situated in S.F.No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2, Velacheri Village, Chennai to them.
13. The respondents / State Government has filed a counter counter statement in W.P.No.919 of 2014, stating that an extent of 4650 sq. mts. in S.F.No.316/6B2 and 1050 sq.mts in S.F.No.316/6F, totalling 5700 sq. mts of Velacheri Village, was acquired from one Thiru.S.Ramakrishnan under the provision of Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 24/1978) (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") and the possession of the excess vacant land was handed over to the revenue authorities on 24.02.1984 and necessary changes were carried out in the relevant records. The respondents further submitted that an extent of 1600 sq mts in S.F.No.316/6D2 of Velachery Village was acquired from one Thiru.V.S.Shankar, under the provisions of the said Act and the possession of the excess vacant land was handed over to the Revenue Authorities on 24.02.1984. It was submitted that the Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985, alloted the following excess vacant land in Velacheri Village, along with other lands in Selaiyur, Valasarawakkam, Pallikaranai, Thiruvanmiyur to Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The details are as follows:-
Village Survey No. Extent in Sq.mts., Velachery 316/6E1 600 316/6D2 1600 316/6B2 4650 316/6F 1050 316/6I2 4350 12,250 Subsequently, the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association requested to allot an extent of 6250 sq.mts. in the following survey numbers of Velachery Village for housing purpose:-
316/6B2 4650 sq.mts., 316/6D2 1600 sq.mts.
Total 6250 sq.mts Based on the report of the Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax) T.Nagar, a report was received from the Commissioner of Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax vide Lr.No.4160/2000/E2, dated 20.04.2006 to allot 6250 sq.mts (316/6B2-4,650 sq.mts & 316/6D2 - 1600 sq mts) to Government film and TV Employees Welfare Association by Government and cancel the earlier allotment made to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board vide order passed in G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue, dated 25.05.1985. The Government vide letter No.20414/ULC1(2)/2006-5, dated 10.10.2007, requested to get the opinion of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board regarding cancellation of the above said G.O. Regarding this, a detailed report was sent to the Government under the said letter dated 09.04.2008 by the then Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reforms stating that, there is no case for revising the order of Government already issued in 1985 and the request of the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association does not fall within the ambit of G.O.(Ms)No.353, Revenue (ULC.1(1) Department, dated 30.06.2000. Hence, the recommendations of the Office of the Commissioner (ULC & ULT) vide their letter dated 20.04.2006 and 09.08.2007, may be treated as cancelled and the earlier allotment order made to Tamil Nadu Housing Board may stand. In the meantime, Thiru.S.Ramakrishnan filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 before the Hon'ble High Court against the acquisition of land in S.No.316/6B2 of Velacheri Village and it is pending in the Hon'ble High Court. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, in its letter No.LA(1)5/9479/05, dated 01.04.2008, 14.07.2011 and 16.07.2012, requested the Government to grant permission and to fix the land value for the lands in S.F.No.316/6B2 and 316/6I2.
14. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 additionally stated that the lands have been acquired under the provision of the said Act and alloted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. Hence, the petitioner Associations have no rights and responsibility to protest and maintain the said lands. In response to the writ petitioner's representation, dated 07.08.2013, and as per the orders of this Court in W.P.No.23629 of 2013, dated 21.10.2013, the first respondent herein has rejected the request of the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association to allot the land in S.F.No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 measuring an extent of 6250 sq.mts in Velachery Village vide G.O.Ms.No.549, Rev. (ULC 1(2) / Department, dated 31.12.2013 stating that the said lands have already been allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985 and also stated that the writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 filed by one Thiru.S.Ramakrishnan, in the High Court of Madras against the acquisition of his land in S.No.316/6B2 at Velachery Village is pending before the High Court of Madras.
15. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 further stated that based on the report of the Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax), T.Nagar, a report was received from the second respondent herein to Government in this office Lr.No.4160/2000/E2, dated 20.04.2006 to allot 6250 sq.mts (316/6B2-4650 sq mts & 316/6D2 - 1600 sq mts) to Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association by cancelling earlier allotment made to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue, dattd 25.05.1985. The Government, vide Lr.No.20414/ULC 1(2)/2006-5, dated 10.10.2007 requested to get the opinion of Tamil Nadu Housing Board regarding cancellation of the above said G.O. Regarding this, a detailed report was sent to the Government by the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reforms, under their office letter dated 09.04.2008 by the then Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reforms stating that, there is no case for revising the order of Government already issued in 1985, and the request of the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association does not fall within the ambit of G.O.(Ms)No.353, Revenue (ULC-1(1) Department, dated 30.06.2000. Hence, the recommendation of the office of the Commissioner (ULC & ULT) vide their letters dated 20.04.2006 and 09.08.2007 may be treated as cancelled and the earlier allotment order to Tamil Nadu Housing Board may stand. In the meantime, Tr.S.Ramakrishnan filed a W.P.No.11205 of 2008 before this Court against the acquisition of the land in S.F.No.316/6B2 of Velacheri Village and it is pending in this Court. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, in its letter No.LA(1)5/9479/05, dated 01.04.2008, 14.07.2011 and 16.07.2012 requested the Government to grant permission to enter upon the alloted lands and to fix the land value for the lands in S.No.316/6B2 and 316/6I2. Therefore, the writ petitioner's representation deserves no consideration and should be dismissed.
16. The respondents / State Government has also filed counter statement in the connected writ petition No.11205 of 2008, and resisted the said writ petition. The respondents submit that in this case one Thiru.S.Ramarksihnan had filed a return under Section 7(1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 on 14.09.1978. A draft statement under Section 9(1) with notice under Section 9(4) of the said Act calling for the objection, if any, for the proposed acquisition of excess vacant land held by him in Survey No.316/6B and 316/6F totally measuring an extent of 5529.75 sq. mts at Velachery Village was issued by him on 05.11.1981. The urban land owner received the same on 13.11.1981. Since no objection was received, the second respondent, viz., Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax) being the competent authority, had passed order under Section 9(5) of the Act in his proceedings in R.C.No.4592/81 D, dated 17.12.1981 declaring the excess vacant land as 5529.75 sq mts, after allowing 500 sq. mts towards individual entitlement. The final settlement under Section 10(1) of the Act was issued on 03.06.1982 and it was sent by RPAD, which was also acknowledged on 08.06.1982. The notification under Section 11(1) of the Act 24/1978 was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 09.03.1983 as per notification VI(1)/226/83, dated 13.12.1982 at Page No.99. Notification under Section 11(3) of the Act, vesting the land with Government was also published in Tamil Nadu Government gazette dated 02.01.1983 at page 484. The notification under Section 11(5) of the Act was issued on 11.10.1983 and served on 17.10.1983.
17. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 additionally stated that the possession of the excess vacant land was taken and handed over to the Revenue Authorities on 25.02.1984. The urban land owner had also received an amount of Rs.2,850/- being 25% of the payment under Section 12(6) of the Act 24 of 1978 for having taken over the land and stamped receipt is available in the current file at page No.191. The above documents clearly prove that the land was acquired after serving the notices properly under the provisions of the Act 24/78 and the excess land has been taken over from the original land owner after following due process of law and after due notice and opportunity provided to him. After completion of acquisition process, the excess lands taken over, after acquirement were allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board by the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, in its D.O.Lr.R.Dis 12/67904/84, dated 04.08.1999 had informed the Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Reforms that the lands are necessarily required by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for its development. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, in its Lr.Hs.1830/08/1070/90, dated 11.08.2008 , has requested the Commissioner of Land Reforms to grant permission to enter upon the said lands in S.F.Nos.316/6B2, 316/6I2 (9000 sq meters).
18. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 further stated that, while possession of excess land has been taken over from the land owner as per law, the power agent, after a long gap of 24 years, has filed this writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008, before the High Court, on behalf of urban land owner, Thiru.S.Ramakrishnan and interim injunction has been granted on 29.04.2008. It is further submitted that the land was acquired after following the due procedure scrupulously and the possession of the land was handed over to the revenue authorities in the year 1984 itself. Hence, the contentions of the petitioner to the contrary is false and is denied. As per the records, neither the petitioner nor his power agent filed registered documents and also not filed patta before the competent authority (ULC), Alandur. In the absence of authenticated and relevant records, the second respondent, viz., Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax) took action based on the official records and as per the provisions of the Act. A notice was issued to the urban land owner by the second respondent in his reference No.322/78, dated 23.04.1979 to appear before him for enquiry on 02.05.1979 with original title deeds to prove the ownership in this connection with the return filed and to arrive at the excess vacant land as per the provisions of the Act. The said notice was received by Thiru.V.S.Sankar on 25.04.1979 on behalf of the urban land owner. In response to that notice, the counsel of the urban land owner requested time which was granted by the second respondent. Subsequently, the second respondent issued notice on 28.01.1981 fixing the enquiry on 02.03.1981 and the said notice was served on 07.02.1981. The representative of Thiru.V.S.Shankar i.e., erstwhile urban land owner appeared before the second respondent on 23.02.1981 and gave statement that the land in Survey No.316/6 at Velacheri Village is vacant and was held by the urban land owner and the other land in S.F.No.361/10E at Perungudi Village measuring an extent of 1.84 acres has been acquired by the Government and no other lands are owned by the urban land owner and did not object to the proceedings of the second respondent. The second respondent, being the competent authority passed orders under Section 9(5) of the Act on 11.12.1981 after allowing 500 sq. mts, as eligibility and declared an extent of 5529.75 sq. mts., as excess vacant land to be acquired. Hence, the action has been taken as per the provisions of the Act and the second respondent had not acted in a mechanical manner as alleged by the petitioner.
19. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 additionally stated that the urban land owner has not filed any adangal extracts / cultivation records before the second respondent in support of the contentions that the lands were agricultural lands and not urban lands. Since the lands were assessed for urban land tax in 1975 and hence, it was evident that it was not agricultural land, when notice was issued. As such, the petitioner's contentions is not acceptable. Further, the final statement under Section 10(1) of the Act was issued on 03.06.1982 and it was received by the urban land owner on 08.06.1982. Thereafter, a notification 12(1) of the Act, was issued in Tamil Nadu Government gazette dated 09.03.1983 by the second respondent, as per notification No.VI(1)226/83, dated 13.12.1982. The second respondent issued the notification under Section 11(3) of the Act, vesting the land with the Government, which was published in Tamil Nadu Government gazette dated 21.09.1983. Notice under Section 11(5) of the Act was issued on 11.10.1983 and served on 17.10.1983. The possession of the excess land was taken over on 25.02.1984. The notice under Section 12(7) was issued on 24.01.1984 which was received by the urban land owner on 31.04.1984. The urban land owner did not raise any objection. He had also received an amount of Rs.2,850/-, being 25% of the payment under Section 12(6) of the Act for having taken over the land. As such, the petitioner's contentions that in April 2008, officials tried to forcibly take possession of the land and then only he came to know the entire proceedings taken under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1978 by the first and second respondents is not at all true and are totally false. The petitioner has contended that the land was in his possession. However, it is clear from the revenue records that the possession of the land has been taken by the Government and was also allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for development of housing project. It is not known whether he entered the land unauthorizedly since the request is only for allotment of the land to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.
20. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 further stated that all the orders have been sent through RPAD and acknowledgments were received. It is relevant to submit that 25% of the amount fixed under Section 12(6) of the Act was claimed and paid to the petitioner and stamped receipt was obtained from the land owner. The acquired land was also alloted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board as per the G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue, dated 25.05.1985. Since the acquisition proceedings were initiated with due enquiry, the contention of the petitioner is false and baseless. It is further submitted that after following the relevant procedures, as laid down under the Act 24 of 1978, and after giving due notices and services of notices only, the land was acquired and taken possession of and handed over to revenue authorities on 25.02.1984 and the lands had come to be vested with the Government. The amount was also paid to the urban land owner and receipt was obtained, but the petitioner has contended that he is in continuous possession of the land. It is not known, whether the urban land owner has encroached upon the land unauthorizedly, after he was allowed to retain certain extent of land as per eligibility and entitlement under the Act. If any part of excess land is in his possession, it is unauthorized and illegal and the urban land owner should not have usurped the land taking advantage of the delay in development of the land by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.
21. The respondents / State Government in writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 further submit that excess vacant land was acquired and changes were carried out in the revenue records in Taluk 8A No.112/1393 and the land was allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the scheme work on 25.05.1985. Therefore,the petitioner's contention is untenable. The acquisition proceedings were taken as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978. The possession of the excess vacant land was also taken over in the year 1984 itself i.e, about 25 years ago The action taken is cited as per Section 3(1)(a) of Repeal Act 20 of 1999 and therefore, the land is vested with the Government and not the petitioner. The respondents further submitted that the land in question was assessed to Urban Land Tax under Tamil Nadu Urban Land Tax Act, 1975. Hence, the contentions of the petitioner that the land is agricultural land is also false and baseless. Moreover, the contentions that the said land is agricultural in nature has not been established through production of adangal extracts / cultivation records. The petitioner himself has filed the return under Section 7(1) of the Act and his authorized representative in his statement before the second respondent herein, being competent authority of urban land ceiling, had stated that the land is vacant. Therefore, the petitioner's contention is hereby denied. The possession of the excess vacant land was taken over and given to revenue authorities on 25.02.1984 and on that day itself, the land has been vested under the control of Government. The claim of the petitioner that he is in possession is illegal and he deserves to be evicted from the land since this case falls under Section 3(1)(a) of the Repeal Act and as such, abatement under the Repeal Act will not arise and he is not entitled for any relief. In this case, acquisition proceedings was completed in the year 1984 itself which cannot be challenged under the Repeal Act, 1999. The petitioner is trying to get back the land on some pretext or other, which is illegal. Hence, the respondents pray to dismiss the above writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 also.
22. The Tami Nadu Housing Board has filed separate counter statement in W.P.No.919 of 2014 stating that the writ petitioners are strangers and they are in no way connected to the property and the present writ petition has been filed with suppression of the fact and the same is filed with intention to grab Government land. Further, the Government in G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985, allotted the land in S.F.No.316/6E1, 314/6D2, 316/6B2, 316/6F and 316/6I2 of Velacheri Village to an extent of 12,250 sq. mts to Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementing housing scheme. Subsequently, the Government in letter No.R.C.E2/2393C/98, dated 20.04.2000 has allotted an extent of 203 sq mts in S.F.No.316/6F to MTP (Railways). As per the details collected from the Office of MTP, an extent of 934 sq. mts of land comprised in 316/6E1, 314/6D2 and 316/6F was proposed for allotment to MTP (Railways). The balance extent of land 11316 sq. mts is available for the allotment to Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board addressed to the Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling to grant permission to enter upon the property for utilizing the land. The Deputy Secretary to Government, Revenue Department has also been addressed by the Board under letter No.LAI(5)/9479/05, dated 14.07.2011 to direct the Commissioner of Urban Land Ceiling to grant permission to enter upon the property. The Government of Tamil Nadu Vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985 has allotted the land comprised in S.F.No.316/6E1, 316/6D2, 316/6F and 316/6I2 of Velacheri Village to an extent of 12250 sq mts to Tamil Nadu Hosing Board for implementing housing scheme. Therefore, the said lands are vested with the Government since 1985.
23. The third respondent / Tamil Nadu Housing Board in W.P.No.919 of 2014 further stated that the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985, has alloted the land in survey No.316/6E1, 316/6D2, 316/6F and 316/6I2 of Velacheri Village to an extent of 12250 sq. mt to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementing the housing scheme. The lands are essentially required for Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementation of housing scheme. Therefore, the contentions of the writ petitioner is hereby denied. Another association, viz., Bharat Rathna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association has filed impleading petition and also claimed rights over the Government property. As per G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985, the land was allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board. However, both the associations are strangers and they have no right over the land. Further, both the parties have colluded with each other, filing application by application to stall the entire proceedings. Therefore, the present writ petition and the petition filed by the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 is liable to be dismissed in-limine. Further, there is no such letters and notifications produced by the writ petitioner herein. Further, no such recommendation has been given in favour of the petitioner's association and the entire possession of the land is vested with the Government. The writ petitioner Association has represented through its letter dated 23.08.2004 to the Hon'ble Minister for Housing and Urban Development that they are maintaining the property since 1985, but the said writ petitioner's association has been registered only on 01.03.1999. Therefore, the writ petitioner herein has falsely represented as if they are maintaining the property since 1985. As such, there is no iota of evidence produced by the petitioner to prove their possession and enjoyment.
24. The third respondent / Tamil Nadu Housing Board in W.P.No.919 of 2014 further stated that the land was already allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.773/Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985 for implementation of housing to the general public. Further, the Government is again confirming the same vide G.O.Ms.No.548, Revenue (ULC-1(2), Department dated 31.12.2013. It is further submitted that lands are essentially required for Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementation of housing schemes and the lands are vested with the Government. Therefore, the contentions of the writ petitioner that they are maintaining the land since 1985 is absolutely false. The alleged representation dated 23.08.2004, by the petitioner herein for allotment of land to the petitioner Association is false and it cannot be treated as valid and effective representation, because, there is no postal booking slip or copy of the acknowledgment card filed by the petitioner herein to prove the representation. As such, the writ petitioner herein has intentionally created the documents to prolong the present proceedings.
25. The third respondent / Tamil Nadu Housing Board in W.P.No.919 of 2014 additionally submits that the land was already allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.773/Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985 for implementation of housing to the general public. Therefore, the writ petitioner's Association cannot claim any right over the property. Further, the land is essentially required for implementation of housing scheme. The writ petitioner has created the documents with an intention to grab the Government land and they are in no way connected to the land and the said land is vested with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board since 25.05.1985. The documents filed by the petitioner herein had not conferred any legal right and title over the property. Hence, it was prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
26. The highly competent senior counsel, Mr.R.P.Kabilan appearing for the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association, Rep. by its Secretary / writ petitioner in W.P.No.919 of 2014 submits that the writ petitioner's association had been registered under the Societies Act vide registration No.115 of 1999. The society consists of around 32 members and it was established for the welfare of the employees in the Tamil Nadu Government Film and TV institute. The said Association has launched a scheme for providing residential plots to its members on a community housing basis. Further, the petitioner's Association had made a representation to the Director of the Urban Land Society and Regulation on 01.03.2006 and had requested the Director to provide residential plots to its members under the Housing Scheme. The Association had also informed that the lands situated in Survey Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 of Velachery Village, a total extent of 4650 sq. mts. and 1600 sq. mts of vacant lands respectively are available. Therefore, the Association had requested the Director of the Urban Land Society to allot the said lands for the Association members under Community Housing Scheme.
27. The highly competent senior counsel, Mr.R.P.Kabilan appearing for the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association further submits that the lands are vested with the Government of Tamil Nadu by virtue of acquisition under the Urban Land Ceiling Act. Besides, the petitioner's Association informed that the lands have been under their maintenance and protection from the year 1985. On 22.03.2006, the Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling and Tax, T.Nagar had issued a letter Na.Ka.No.219/06 to the petitioner's Association calling upon them to provide information and other details with regard to the lands in the said survey numbers and with regard to their request for the allotments for the housing scheme. Supporting his contention, the learned counsel had annexed a communication which had been issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax and Land Ceiling), T.Nagar, in response to the request of the petitioner's Association and pursuant to the meeting on 10.04.2006. In the said letter, the Assistant Commissioner had mentioned that the proposal for allotment of the said lands to the petitioner's Association is being forwarded to the second respondent herein, viz., the Special Commissioner (Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization) for further action and proceedings. The Assistant Commissioner had also mentioned that steps will be taken for obtaining the Government Order in this regard and the same shall be informed to the petitioner's Association. He further submits that the second respondent had written a letter dated 09.08.2007, in refer.Na.Ka.4160/2000 E2, to the first respondent herein, viz., the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department. Supporting the contention, the highly competent senior counsel had annexed a document as proof. Subsequently, the Government authorities informed the writ petitioner's Association that the Deputy Secretary had written a letter in reference No.20414/Na Nee/1(2)/2006-5, dated 10.10.2007, to the second respondent herein and enquired as to the status and details with regard to the allotment of the land to the writ petitioner's Association. Subsequently, the Association had made a representation to the third respondent in this regard on 23.08.2004 and the second respondent informed to the writ petitioner's Association orally that they are facing other legal issues which needs to be sorted out before initiating proceedings for allotting the land to the petitioner's Association. In the meantime, the Association had taken all efforts to safeguard and maintain the land on a firm belief that the said lands would be allotted to them for their housing scheme by the Government of Tamil Nadu. Under these circumstances, some miscreants are trying to play fraud by creating forged document to claim the property and also execute a bogus sale deed to third parties for a portion of land. Besides some of them are trying to encroach the said property. Thereafter, on 07.08.2013, one more representation was submitted to the first respondent, wherein he was requested to allot the above said land for the petitioner's housing scheme. After receipt of the said representation, the first respondent remained continuously silent. Hence, the Association had moved writ petition in W.P.No.23629 of 2013 before this Court and sought direction to consider the petitioner's representation with regard to allotment of the said lands. This Court had directed the first respondent to dispose the said representation within specified period and accordingly the representation had been disposed of by giving the reasons that the said two items of property were already allotted to Tamil Nadu Housing Board and that the acquisition proceedings had been challenged through a writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 by one Thiru S.Ramakrishnan.
28. The highly competent senior counsel, Mr.R.P.Kabilan appearing for the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association further submits that the first respondent mechanically rejected the petitioner's representation without considering the fact that the second respondent had already written a letter to the first respondent on 09.08.2007 recommending allotment of lands in Survey No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 of Velachery Village to the petitioner's Association. Further, the power with regard to allotment of usage of the lands acquired under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, is vested with the Tamil Nadu Government, which is also empowered to fix a price for the sale of such a land. The acquisition proceedings had been completed in the year 1984. Thereafter, the said land is still vacant. Neither the Government nor the Housing Board are utilizing the said land for the past 25 years. Therefore, the petitioner's Association are entitled to receive allotment order from the respondents since they are Government employees and have no house sites. Thereafter, the Revenue Authorities stated that on 25.05.1985 the excess lands allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. As per the allotment order, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had not occupied the land, however, the petitioner's Association is in possession of the subject land and in order to prove the physical possession, the highly competent senior counsel has submitted EB card, EB receipt, property tax and demand notice. On 31.12.2013, the first respondent passed G.O.Ms.No.549, dated 31.12.2013, rejecting the claim of the petitioner stating that the subject land was allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board Challenging the said G.O, the above writ petition has been filed by the Association. At this juncture, one Mr.M.Baskar, and 38 others have filed an impleading petition to implead them as necessary parties. Actually, they are in no way connected with the said property. The lands in Survey No.316/6J, has been allotted to the Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association, by order passed in G.O.Ms.No.918, Revenue Department, dated 19.11.1998. Subsequently, the same was cancelled by G.O.Ms.No.48, Revenue Department, dated 30.01.2008 and the said cancellation proceedings was challenged by the impleading petitioner in a separate writ petition in W.P.No.5000 of 2011. The said writ petition was disposed of on 31.07.2012 and the respondents / Government were directed to allot alternate site, but the same was not complied with. Hence, the impleading petitioner has filed contempt petition No.544 of 2013, for non-implementation of order passed in W.P.No.5000 of 2011. Subsequently, the Government has filed a writ appeal in W.A.No.1110 of 2013 and challenged the order passed in W.P.No.5000 of 2011, which is pending on the file of this Court. As such, they have no locus standi to seek one more judicial relief before this Court. Thereafter, some miscreants had attempted to interfere with the subject matter of the property and hence, the writ petitioner's Association had levelled a criminal complaint at J13, Taramani Police Station, on 12.08.2013 and 16.03.2014, respectively. The said complaints are pending enquiry. Further, the writ petitioner in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 had received compensation and handed over the subject land to Government. The said proceedings had been completed in the year 1984. After an expiry of 30 years, the writ petitioner has filed the writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008, which is not maintainable under law. Hence, the highly competent senior counsel entreats the Court to allow the writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 and dismiss prayer of the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014, and also dismiss the writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008.
29. Mr.S.Ramesh, highly competent counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 submits that the subject lands originally were allotted to one Mr.K.Subramaniam and his sons under a registered valid instrument. The said property was subsequently allotted to the petitioner herein under registered partition deed to an extent of 1.5 acres in Survey No.316/6B. The revenue records and connected records were mutated in the name of the petitioner. The said land is used only for cultivation purpose. The same was revealed to the second respondent herein / Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax) by way of statement. Without considering this fact, the respondent declared that an extent of 5529.75 sq.mts. was excess vacant land. After preparing a final statement under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act 1978, the competent authority proceeded in a mechanical manner and declared that an extent of 5529.75 sq. mts of land as excess vacant land, by his order dated 17.12.1981. After passing this order, the petitioner has remained continuously in possession of land without any third party interference.
30. The highly competent counsel appearing for petitioner / Mr.S.Ramakrishnan further submits that in the month of April 2008, the third respondent accompanied by certain officials tried to forcibly take possession of the lands and only thereupon the petitioner came to know that the entire proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 were completed by the Assistant Commissioner and Special Commissioner for Urban Land Ceiling. The petitioner had initially filed return statements under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978. Subsequently, final order has been passed and as such, the respondents have not followed the proper procedures for acquiring the said land as the petitioner, who is still in physical possession, had assumed that the said acquisition proceedings were dropped by the respondents. The petitioner is entitled to get exemption from the acquisition proceedings since the land is classified as cultivable land. As such, the respondents have no jurisdiction to initiate acquisition proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act. Now, the petitioner is seeking a remedy under Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Repeal Act 20 of 1999.
31. The highly competent counsel appearing for petitioner / Mr.S.Ramakrishnan submits that the proceedings initiated by the respondents under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act 24 of 1978 for acquiring the petitioner's land is unconstitutional and ultra vires, since the lands have been exclusively used for agricultural purpose. The definition of Section 3(o) that:-
"i. any land situated within the limits of the urban agglomeration and referred to as such in the master plan or ii. in a case where there is no master plan, or where the master plan does not refer to any land as urban land, any land within the limits of an urban agglomeration but does not include any such land which is mainly used for the purpose of agriculture."
In the instant case, the petitioner was cultivating the said land, as such, the petitioner's land cannot be termed as urban lands. Therefore, the entire acquisition proceedings which had been initiated by the respondents 1 and 2 are not sustainable under law. The possession of the subject lands are not taken over by the competent authorities concerned and as such proceedings shall abate as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case reported in JT 2000 Supp 1 SC 295. Following this judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court has set-aside the proceedings in several judgments when the possession continued to vest with the owners. In the instant case, the said land is still vacant and not occupied by the respondents. As such, the acquisition proceedings of the respondents is not fit to be proceeded with any further. Hence, the learned counsel entreats to declare that the entire proceedings initiated by the Assistant Commissioner, (Urban Land Tax) for acquiring the land in Survey No.316/6B2 as void.
32. The highly competent counsel Mr.B.Rabu Manohar appearing for the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014 submits that the petitioner's Association, viz., Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association was initially allotted land measuring 6690 sq. mts. in Survey No.316/6J, Velachery Village, Mambalam Guindy Taluk, Chennai, by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.918, Revenue Department, dated 19.11.1998. In turn, the Association plotted out the lands and allotted land measuring an extent of 800 sq. ft. to each of the Associate members. Subsequently, the respondents-Government without issuing any prior notice or inquiry cancelled the said original allotment order, which is an unilateral order and also prejudicial to the interest of the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43. The cancellation order was passed under G.O.Ms.No.48, Revenue Department, dated 30.01.2008 i.e., after around a period of 10 years. The said cancellation proceedings had been challenged by the impleading petitioners by way of writ proceedings in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011 before this Court. This Court, after hearing both sides have come to the conclusion that the order cancelling allotment was incorrect since no notice was served on the impleading petitioners herein. However, this Court had directed the Government to provide alternative site to the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 herein within a period of four months. This order has been passed on 31.07.2012. After receipt of the said order, the respondents/Government had not complied with the said conditional order and hence, a contempt petition in Contempt Petition No.544 of 2013 had been levelled against the respondents/Government. Under the circumstances, the Government has filed a Writ Appeal in W.A.No.1110 of 2013 and challenged the learned Single Judge's Order passed in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011, dated 31.07.2012. He further submits that the subject land is now vested with the respondents/Government of the said area and hence, in order to execute this Court's order passed in the said writ petitions, the subject lands may be allotted to the impleading petitioner's Association.
33. The highly competent counsel Mr.B.Rabu Manohar appearing for the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014 further submits that the said Association members belong to the Scheduled Caste Category and also do not have any house-sites. On the strength of the original allotment order under G.O.Ms.No.918, Revenue Department, dated 19.11.1998, the impleading petitioner's association occupied the land and they are in physical possession since the land had been acquired by the Government. Therefore, the highly competent counsel entreats the Court to allot the subject matter of the land as it has been found appropriate as per the learned Single Judge order in the above mentioned two writ petitions.
34. The highly competent counsel Mr.B.Rabu Manohar appearing for the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014 further submits that Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association had issued individual allotment order to these respondents. In the meanwhile since the State Government did not obey the order passed by this Court dated 31.07.2012, these respondents filed contempt petition in Contempt Petition No.544 of 2013 and notice was issued to the respondents 1 to 4. He further submits that these respondents made a representation dated 27.08.2012 before the first respondent requesting them to allot the land acquired by the Government in Survey No.316/6B2 situated at No.137, Velachery Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai-78, as alternative site to these respondents and the same is still pending. He further submits that the State Government has also filed a writ appeal against the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5000 and 6585 of 2011, dated 31.07.2012 and the same is still pending. Due to the fact that the Government has filed an appeal, these respondents have also filed an appeal against the said judgment in W.A.No.1110 of 2013. He further submits that they came to know that the adjacent land viz., the land in Survey No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 at Velachery Village was acquired by the Director of Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax and the land was handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the purpose of allotting the same to the landless poor. In spite of handing over of the site to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, till today the Tamil Nadu Housing Board did not take possession of the land or pay the amount due to the Government for taking over the said land. He further submits that these respondents came to know that the petitioner in this writ petition, viz., the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association have approached this Court staking claim for allotment of this land to the Association so that the same could be used by the members, who are the Government Film and TV Employees. He further submits that the petitioner-Association itself has become defunct. The registration number of the petitioner-Association is 115 of 1999 and an application was filed under the RTI Act requesting whether this Association was still functioning. A reply was received on 01.04.2014 stating that from the year 2000 onwards the Association has not filed details regarding the statutory provisions under Section 16(3)(b) under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Societies Act, 1975. He further submits that the petitioner Association has become defunct and most of the members have left the Association and as such, the petitioner-Association has no valid claim. On the other hand, these respondents were allotted the adjacent land by the Government and they have been illegally evicted by the 1 to 4 respondents and this Court in judgment dated 31.07.2012 had held that the eviction was illegal. He further submits that this Court after having found that these respondents had made out a case and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings have directed the State Government to allot alternative sites to these respondents. Hence, these respondents 5 to 43 have prayed to allot the land situated in Survey No.316/6B2 and 316/6D2, Velachery Village, Chennai-600 042.
35. The very competent Additional Government Pleader Mr.M.S.Ramesh appearing for the respondents / Government submits that in the instant case one Ramakrishnan filed statements under Section 7(1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 on 14.09.1978. The draft statement under Section 9(1) with notice under Section 9(4) of the said Act calling for objection, if any, for the proposed acquisition of excess vacant land, was issued to him on 05.11.1981 and the urban land onwer received the same on 13.11.1981. After the receipt of the said notice, no objection was received. Hence, the second respondent had passed order in his proceedings R.C.No.4592/81D, dated 17.12.1981, declaring that the excess vacant land an extent of 5529.75 sq. mts. after allowing 500 sq. mts. towards individual entitlement. This final statement was also received by the land owner on 08.06.1982. Subsequently, gazette notification was published on 09.03.1983, after the gazette publication, the possession of the excess vacant land was taken and handed over to the Revenue Authorities on 25.02.1984. He further pointed out that the land owners had received compensation of a sum of Rs.2,850/- and in order to prove the payment of compensation, the land owners issued a stamped receipt. As such, the acquisition proceedings for acquiring the excess land has become final. Therefore, the Government is the owner of the said property. Subsequently, the Government had allotted the said land to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board under G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985. The Housing Board had informed to the Commissioner of Land Reforms that the lands are necessarily required by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for its development. The Housing Board sought permission from the Commissioner of Land Reforms to enter into the property on 11.08.2008 and as such, the property is not vested with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and this is the final position of the case. As such, the writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008, which has been filed after a gap of 24 years, by the writ petitioner is not maintainable considering the facts of the case and limited period.
36. The very competent Additional Government Pleader Mr.M.S.Ramesh appearing for the respondents / Government submits that as per the Revenue Records and connected records, the lands have been mutated in the name of the respondents from the name of the original owner. At the time of enquiry for acquiring the land, one Thiru.V.S.Shankar appeared and had given statement in a representative capacity after production of respondents notice. The land owner did not object the proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling. Therefore, all necessary legal formalities had been observed for taking acquisition of the land and sufficient opportunities were given to the land owners during acquirement of the said land. Therefore, there is no lapse on the part of the respondents. The lands were not agricultural land since the said lands were assessed for Urban Land Tax Act, 1975. Hence, at the time of initiating the land acquisition proceedings, the said land was classified as urban land. Under these circumstances, the writ petitioners cannot challenge the said acquisition proceedings since it has become final in the year 1984 itself. Therefore, the very competent Additional Government Pleader Mr.M.S.Ramesh entreats the Court to dismiss both the writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 and writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 with costs. Supporting his argument, he had cited the below mentioned judgments:-
(i) Maria Joseph Roy Versus Competent Authority, Chennai reported in (2008) 2 MLJ 143 " Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act (20 of 1999), Section 3 - Excess vacant land - Landowner receiving compensation as per Section 12 of Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 - physical possession not with the landowner - vesting of lands, accepted by the landowner - Landowner cannot claim that possession is still with him - Provisions of Repeal Act, cannot be invoked - writ petition dismissed."
(ii) SULOCHANA CHANDRAKANT GALANDE v. PUNE MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT reported in (2010) 8 SCC 467 " A.Tenancy and Land Laws - Ceiling on land - Urban Land (ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - Ss.10, 9 and 11 - "vesting" of land in State free from all "encumbrances" after acquisition - Connotation of - Power of State to change user of land thereafter - Scope of - Held, said vesting means vesting of land in State without any charge or burden in it i.e., State has absolute title /ownership over it - Landowner becomes persona non grata after vesting and has right to compensation only - Person interested cannot claim right of restoration of land on any ground whatsoever - Land once vested in the State cannot be divested and State has right to change user - Appellant not entitled to any relief on any ground whatsoever - Constitution of India - Art.300-A - Words and Phrases - "Vesting", "encumbrance". "
Besides, the very competent Additional Government Pleader had produced relevant documents pertaining to the said acquisition supporting his case.
37. Per contra, Mr.S.Ramesh, highly competent counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 submits that the respondents / Government had categorically admitted in their counter statement that the Housing Board had sent a letter on 11.08.2008 and had requested the Commissioner of Land Reforms to grant permission to enter into the said land, which clearly proves that the land owner is in physical possession and enjoyment of the same. In support of his contentions, he has cited the following judgments:-
(i) State of U.P. Vs. Hari Ram reported in CDJ 2013 SC 193 "Constitution of India - Article 226 - The Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - Section 6, Section 8(3)(4), Section 10(3), Section 33 - Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 - Section 3 - Sections 10(3), 10(5), 10(6) - The Uttar Pradesh Urban Land Ceiling (Taking of possession payment of amount and Allied Matters) Directions 1983 - Section 35 - deemed vested - question whether the deemed vesting of surplus land would amount to taking de facto possession depriving the land holders of the benefit of the Clause under Section 3 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999."
(ii) The Government of Tamil Nadu & Others v. M/s.Mecca Prime Tannery and Others reported in 2012 4 LW 289 " Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, (1976), Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act (1978), Sections 3(n) / 'urban agglomeration', 3(a)/'urban land', Section 6/'transfer of vacant land', Section 11, Acquisition of vacant land in excess 'vesting', what is, Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act (1999) / Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (Act 20 of 1999), Words and Phrases /'vesting'.
Section 11(3) of the Act clearly provides that after the notification is issued under Section 11 declaring the excess vacant land, same shall be deemed to have been acquired and vested in the State Government, free from all encumbrances - Section 11(3) does not provide that after the notification, the State Government shall be deemed to have come into possession of the land so declared as excess land - After vesting of the land in the State under Section 11(3), the State has to initiate action for taking possession of the land.
'Shall be deemed to have been acquired' and 'shall be deemed to have been vested absolutely in the State Government' in Section 11(3) of the Act, mean that the right, title and interest in respect of the land shall be deemed to have been vested in the State Government and not possession of the land."
38. The very competent counsel, Mr.B.Viveka Vanan appearing for the Tamil Nadu Housing Board submits that both the writ petitioners are strangers and they have no connection in the said property, which had been acquired by the Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling and handed over to the Secretary, who is attached to the Revenue Department. In turn, the said property along with 4 items of property had been allotted to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementing Housing Schemes, to an extent of 12250 sq mts, under G.O.Ms.No.773, Revenue Department, dated 25.05.1985. Thereafter, the government had reallotted an extent of 203 sq. mts in Survey No.316/6F to the Metro Transport Project for Railway. The balance extent of 11,316 sq. mts. is available for the allotment to the Tamil Ndu Housing Board. As such, the property has been vested with the Tamil Nadu Housing Board since 1985 onwards. The land has been assigned to Tamil Nadu Housing Board for implementing Housing Schemes to the general public. Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association had also claimed the right over the Government property after filing impleading petition, which is not maintainable at this stage since the said property is vested with the Tamilnadu Government as per G.O.Ms.No.773, dated 25.05.1985. The Government is again confirming the said order by way of another G.O.Ms.No.548, issued by Revenue Department, dated 31.12.2013. Therefore, the petitioner in W.P.No.919 of 2014 and the respondents 5 to 43 therein are trying to grab the valuable Government land, which is situated at a prime location in Chennai. Therefore, the highly competent counsel entreats the Court to dismiss both the writ petitions and also not consider the prayer made by the impleading petitioners.
39. Per contra, the highly competent senior counsel, Mr.R.P.Kabilan appearing for the Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association submits that as per the counter statement filed by the Housing Board a portion of the land i.e., an extent of 203 sq. mts. in survey No.316/6F was alloted to Metro Transport Project for Railways and another extent of 934 sq. mts of land was proposed for allotment to Metro Transport Project for Railway in the land comprised in Survey No.316/6EI, 314/6D2 and 316/6F but not in the Survey No.316/6B2. Therefore, the contention is not applicable to the writ petitioner's claim.
40. In the above writ petitions, the below mentioned factual issues arise for consideration:-
(i) Whether the writ petitioner in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 is entitled to reconvey the said land to his father?
(ii) Whether the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 are entitled to receive allotment order from the Government regarding the subject matter of the property?
(iii) Why the said property is kept vacant for 30 years as the Land Acquisition Proceedings had been initiated in the year 1981 under Tamil Nadu Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1978, after observing all formalities and as the property has been acquired in the year 1984 itself?
(iv) Whether the writ petitioner in W.P.No.919 of 2014 is entitled to receive allotment order for the subject matter of the property?
41. To decide the above issues, this Court considers the following relevant points:-
(I) The writ petitioner in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 had received compensation of a sum of Rs.2,850/- after completion of the acquisition proceedings. Besides the writ petitioner had not proved that he is in physical possession through production of vital documents as the property is still vacant. Further, the acquisition proceedings had been completed in the year 1984 and the writ petition has been filed in the year 2008 i.e., after about 24 years. Therefore, the writ petitioner's claim in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 is not maintainable since the Government had acquired the excess land and paid the compensation. Therefore, the re-conveyance of the land does not arise in the instant case since the Government acquired the surplus lands.
(II) The impleading petitioner Association / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014, had obtained fruitful orders in W.P.Nos.5000 and 6585 of 2011 before this Court on 31.07.2012. As per the findings of the order made in the said writ petitions, the respondents / Government shall provide alternative site to the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43. The said order is still in force even though under challenge by way of writ appeal filed by the Government. Therefore, the prayer sought by the impleading petitioners / respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014, is not maintainable.
(III) The subject matter pertains to the said property acquired by the Government in the year 1984 and reassigned to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board along with other items of property to an extent of 12250 sq mts. After the allotment to the Housing Board, there is no favourable development in any way, either for utilization of the Government's or allotment to the general public as per the aim and objects of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for the welfare of the general public for around 30 years. It clearly proves that the land is not absolutely required by the Housing Board since it has been kept vacant for a lamentable long period.
(IV) The writ petitioner-Association (W.P.No.919 of 2014), are employees at the Government Film and T.V. It was stated that they are persons who do not have house sites and that they have made representations to the Government authorities. It has also been stated that the said Government authorities also sent communications on 22.03.2006 in Na.Ka.No.219/06 and the said communication is still under process. As per the aim and object of the Housing Board, the said Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association are entitled to receive allotment orders from the respondents consisting of Government and Tamil Nadu Housing Board, after paying for the land cost as evaluated by the Government in order to fulfill the aspirations of the general public and their welfare of which the petitioner's association may be treated as one among them.
42. On considering the factual position of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on all sides and on perusing the relevant records produced by the concerned parties, the view mentioned above i.e., (I) to (IV), this Court is inclined to allow the writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014. Accordingly, the writ petition in W.P.No.919 of 2014 is allowed. Consequently, the concerned records relating to G.O.Ms.No.549/Revenue (ULC-I(2)) Department, dated 31.12.2013 passed by the first respondent, the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, is quashed. Consequently, this Court directs the first respondent to allot the lands to the extent of 6250 sq.metres of lands situated in S.Nos.316/6B2 and 316/6D2 in Velachery Village, Chennai Urban Agglomeration to petitioner's Association, viz., Government Film and TV Employees Welfare Association, Chennai. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The prayer made by the respondents 5 to 43 in W.P.No.919 of 2014/Bharat Ratna Dr.Ambedkar Housing Welfare Association Members is rejected, as it does not have any basis. The writ petition in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 filed by Mr.S.Ramakrishnan is dismissed. Regarding the impleading petitioners / respondents 4 to 6 in W.P.No.11205 of 2008, they have no right or title and they are attempting to get hold of the subject lands by means of forged and fabricated records and they cannot be granted any relief in the collateral proceedings initiated by the land owners and their claim does not have any legal basis. Hence, the prayer made by the respondents 4 to 6 in W.P.No.11205 of 2008 is rejected. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There is no order as to costs.
19 / 08 / 2014
Index : Yes.
Internet : Yes.
r n s
To
1.State Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Revenue Department, Secretariat,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Special Commissioner,
(Urban Land Ceiling and Regularization),
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
3.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Nandanam, Chennai-600 005.
4.The Thasildar,
Guindy Mambalam Taluk,
Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 078.
5.The Competent Authority (Urban Land Ceiling) and
Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Tax)
T.Nagar,
Arcot Road,
Chennai - 600 024.
6.The Tahsildar,
Mambalam-Guindy Taluk,
Chennai-83.
C.S.KARNAN, J.
r n s
Pre Delivery Order made in
W.P.No.No.919 of 2014 and
W.P.No.11205 of 2008 &
M.P.Nos.1 of 2010 and 4 of 2014
19 / 08 /2014