Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 297 (MAD)

M. Vijayakumar v. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Dy. Secretary to Government & Others

2007-01-25

J.A.K.SAMPATHKUMAR, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2007
Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. The appellant preferred the writ petition against the notification issued in G.O.Ms.No.2065, Transport dated 18th April, 1990, by which the respondents made declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the land measuring 0.42 acres bearing Survey No.263/2 situate in Melloor Village, Shencottah Taluk, Tirunelveli District. The main challenge was made on the ground that the Section 6 declaration was barred by limitation, as it has been issued beyond a period of one year from the date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. Having noticed the rival contentions, the learned single Judge was of the opinion that it was well within time, though delay of 17 days was suggested on behalf of the appellant/writ petitioner. 2. For deciding the issue, it is not only necessary to notice the relevant dates but also the relevant provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as mentioned hereunder. 3. Section 4(1) stipulates the publication of preliminary notification in three different modes, as quoted hereunder:- "4. Publication of preliminary notification and powers of officers thereupon.--(1) Whenever it appears to the appropriate Government that land in any locality is needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose or for a company, a notification to that effect shall be published in the Official Gazette and in two daily newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality (the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice, being hereinafter referred to as the date of the publication of the notification). (2) ....." Under Section 6, the appropriate Government may, declare that the land is needed for public purpose or for a company, if so satisfied, but subject to limitation prescribed under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 6, and quoted hereunder:- "6. (2) ....." Under Section 6, the appropriate Government may, declare that the land is needed for public purpose or for a company, if so satisfied, but subject to limitation prescribed under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 6, and quoted hereunder:- "6. Declaration that land is required for a public purpose.--(1) Subject to the provisions of Part VII of this Act, when the appropriate Government is satisfied, after considering the report, if any, made under section 5-A, sub-section (2), that any particular land is needed for a public purpose, or for a company, a declaration shall be made to that effect under the signature of a Secretary to such Government or of some officer duly authorised to certify its orders, and different declarations may be made, from time to time, in respect of different parcels of any land covered by the same notification under section 4, sub-section (1), irrespective of whether one report or different reports has or have been made (wherever required) under section 5-A, sub-section (2): Provided that no declaration in respect of any particular land covered by a notification under section 4, sub-section (1)— .(i) published after the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 1967 (1 of 1967) but before the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, shall be made after the expiry of three years from the date of the publication of the notification; or .(ii) published after the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, shall be made after the expiry of one year from the date of the publication of the notification; Provided further that no such declaration shall be made unless the compensation to be awarded for such property is to be paid by a company, or wholly or partly out of public revenues or some fund controlled or managed by a local authority. Explanation 1.--In computing any of the periods referred to in the first proviso, the period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the notification issued under section 4, sub-section (1), is stayed by an order of a Court shall be excluded. Explanation 2......" 4. In the present case, notification under Section 4(1) was issued on 4th April, 1989; it was published in the Official Gazette on 12th April, 1989 and published in two newspapers on 16th April, 1989. Explanation 2......" 4. In the present case, notification under Section 4(1) was issued on 4th April, 1989; it was published in the Official Gazette on 12th April, 1989 and published in two newspapers on 16th April, 1989. As per sub-section (1) of Section 4, the said notification was locally published by public notice at convenient places on 10th May, 1989. 5. We have noticed that there are three modes of publication prescribed under subsection (1) of Section 4, which includes publication in the Official Gazette, publication in two daily newspapers and publication of public notice at convenient places in the locality. Thus, the date of the last publication, out of three modes, is to be taken into consideration for counting the period of limitation for the purpose of sub-section (1) of Section 6. 6. In the present case, as publication in the locality was made, admittedly, on 10th May, 1989 and the impugned notification under Section 6 was issued vide G.O.Ms.No.2065 Transport dated 18th April, 1990 and published on 2nd May, 1990, the appellant cannot take a plea that the said notification under Section 6 was barred by limitation. The same being well within the period of one year, it cannot be held to be barred by limitation. As there is no merit, the writ appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.