ORDER: The petitioners three in number, have filed the above writ petition for quashing the 4(1) Notification under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Act (Act 31/70) (herein after referred to as the Act), in Na.Ka.No.11/911/2000, dated 4.6.2000 notifying for the acquisition of land of a total extent of about 1 cent comprised in Survey Nos. 486/7A, 486/9B, 486/10 and 486/26 in Kurumbalur of Palayam Village, Perambalur Taluk and District. 2. The brief facts of the case are that lands were acquired for providing pathway to burial ground in S.F.Nos.486/7A, 486/9A, 496/9B, 486/10 and 486/26. The particulars of the same are as follows: After complying the provisions contemplated under the Act, notification under Sec.4(r) was published in the Gazette on 30.6.2000. This notification is now under challenge. 3. The main submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners are: (i) the petitioners’ right guaranteed under Art.19(1)(g) of the Act has been violated; (ii) no notice was served to the petitioners for enquiry; and (iii) no opportunity was given to the petitioners to put forth their objections on the availability of adjacent poromboke land. 4.Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader, submits that the very purpose of the acquisition is for providing pathway to the burial ground intended for Adi Dravidars and only negligible portion of the property i.e., a total extent of 1 cent, from all the five owners put together, have been taken, after giving adequate compensation. On the ground of technical violation, he submits that all the petitioners were given notices and they have replied through their counsel and appeared in person and after completing enquiry, proposals were submitted overruling the objections and thereafter, notification under Sec.4(1) was published and therefore, the notification does not call for any interference. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Special Government Pleader. 6. The Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijans Welfare Schemes Act, 1978 defines the Harijans Welfare Scheme as follows: “(g) Harijan Welfare Scheme means any scheme for provision of house sites for Harijans for constructing, extending or improving any dwelling house for Harijans or for providing any burial or burning ground for Harijans or for providing any pathway leading to such dwelling house, burial or burning grounds or for providing any other amenity for the benefit of Harijans.” 7. One of the purposes for which the scheme can be implemented is for providing a pathway to burial or burning ground. Therefore, under this Act, the Government is empowered to acquire the lands for Harijan Welfare Scheme. The purpose for which the land is acquired, as set out in the notification, is only for the purpose of providing pathway to the burial ground and therefore the question of deprivation of fundamental rights of the petitioners do not arise in this case, since the petitioners are adequately compensated after the acquisition. 8. In so far as notice under Sec.4(2) is concerned, it is specifically stated in the counter that after issuing notices to the petitioners, the matter was posted for enquiry on 12.2.1999. Since some of the land owners were said to be residing outside the village, fresh notices were served and enquiry was postponed to 25.3.1999. The first petitioner Jerome Selvakumar alias Selvam was represented through his father since he was doing job elsewhere. Except him, all the other land owners appeared in person and submitted their objections orally as well as through representations. Mr.Suresh Kumar and Mr.P.Ramakrishnan of Perambalur, the counsel for petitioners 1 and 2 gave a legal notice dated 24.2.1999 on behalf of the first petitioner. All these materials were considered before issuing 4(1) notification by the Land Acquisition Officer. 9. The last submission that their objections were not property considered cannot be sustained because, from the proposal sent by the Land Acquisition Officer, recommending the acquisition and overruling the objections contained in page No.59 of the file, it is seen that objections were separately set out for each of the survey number and respective persons and reasons have been given for overruling the objections. The extract of the same is as follows: 10. It is stated that only if the lands are acquired, the burial ground can be reached and by the acquisition of the land, the owners will not be seriously affected. Even though the owners of the land belong to Adi Dravidar Community, the acquisition of land has become indispensable and necessary. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there are adjacent lands and that was not taken into account by the Land Acquisition Officer cannot be accepted. Before passing of the order, reports from the concerned Village Administrative officer were also obtained. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there are adjacent lands and that was not taken into account by the Land Acquisition Officer cannot be accepted. Before passing of the order, reports from the concerned Village Administrative officer were also obtained. Therefore, there is no substance in the submission that the objections of the petitioners were not considered. 11. Considering the fact that the very negligible extent of land is acquired, namely 0.02 cents from each of the lands owners, totalling 1 cent of land and that the acquisition was preceded by proper notice and enquiry, and also the fact that award has already been passed, I do not find any illegality in the said notification. 12. Under the above circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned notification under Sec.4(1). Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P. No.2008 of 2001 is closed.