JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, pertaining to the Award No.3 dated 29.12.1947, passed against Madhavan Naicker, the father of the petitioner herein, and others under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the fourth respondent herein, by directing the third respondent to forfeit the property comprised in S.No.153/1/2/3/4 and 158 as it is not used for public purpose within the statutory limit by the sixth respondent, by declaring the sale transfer executed by the sixth respondent, registered in the office of the seventh respondent bearing Document No.3847/1992, 3848/1992, 3849/ 1992, 3850/1992 and Document No.676/2000, 677/2000 registered in the office of the eighth respondent, executed by ninth and tenth respondents respectively, pertaining to the acquired property, comprised in S.No.153/3 and 153/4 Nanja and Punja lands located at Ramapuram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District as null and void, with further direction to reconvey the S.No.153/1 admeasuring about 95 cents, Nanja and Punja lands located at Ramapuram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District to the petitioner herein being the person interested.) 1. The writ on hand has been instituted pertaining to the Award No.3 dated 29.12.1947, passed against Madhavan Naicker, the father of the petitioner herein, and others under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the fourth respondent herein, by directing the third respondent to forfeit the property comprised in S.No.153/1/2/3/4 and 158 as it is not used for public purpose within the statutory limit by the sixth respondent, by declaring the sale transfer executed by the sixth respondent, registered in the office of the seventh respondent bearing Document No.3847/1992, 3848/1992, 3849/ 1992, 3850/1992 and Document No.676/2000, 677/2000 registered in the office of the eighth respondent, executed by ninth and tenth respondents respectively, pertaining to the acquired property, comprised in S.No.153/3 and 153/4 Nanja and Punja lands located at Ramapuram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District as null and void, with further direction to reconvey the S.No.153/1 admeasuring about 95 cents, Nanja and Punja lands located at Ramapuram Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District to the petitioner herein being the person interested. 2. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the properties belonged to his family was acquired for public purposes by invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquired lands were handed over for the purpose of establishing Educational Institution, Industrial Training Institute, Orphanage and School. 3. 2. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the properties belonged to his family was acquired for public purposes by invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquired lands were handed over for the purpose of establishing Educational Institution, Industrial Training Institute, Orphanage and School. 3. It is not in dispute between the parties that the lands were acquired for public purposes and for the purpose of establishing Educational Institution for the welfare of the people of that locality. 4. The present writ petition has been instituted after several years from the date of acquisition. The lands were acquired long back and the petitioner being the legal heir of the erstwhile landowner now come out with certain serious allegations that the lands acquired and handed over for public purposes are abused by the Society and the Trust created by the Society/sixth respondent. 5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 10, 11 and 13 raised serious objections mainly on the ground that enormous delay in filing the present writ petition, cannot be entertained. That apart, the lands acquired are being utilised for educational purposes and to maintain orphanage. Thus, there is no violation of the purpose for which it was acquired and handed over to the sixth respondent. 6. It is contended that the petitioner, as of now, has no right in respect of the acquired property and being utilised for public purposes and therefore, the present writ petition is to be rejected. 7. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the sixth respondent-Trust made a submission that Orphanage and Educational Institutions are running in the subject property and a portion of the building has been utilised for other purposes. However, the said lands are not sold in favour of any private persons. Therefore, the complaint raised by the petitioner is false and thus the present writ petition is to be rejected. 8. Since the respective learned Senior Counsels appearing on behalf of respondents 6, 10, 11 and 13 raised serious objections relating to the long delay in filing the present writ petition, this Court directed the Official respondents to conduct Field Inspection and submit Status Report, which has been filed by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 5, 7 and 8. 9. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that amended Sections 16-A, 16-B and 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, pave way for the petitioner for raising complaint against violations and therefore, the complaint filed by the petitioner is to be enquired into. 10. Verification of revenue records, documents and evidences are required in respect of the complaint raised by the petitioner, which is of serious in nature. High Court cannot conduct a Roving Enquiry in writ proceedings of this nature. 11. The present writ petition has been filed seeking Mandamus and therefore, enquiry fact finding is required for the purpose of forming an opinion. Fact finding based on the documents and evidences are of greater assistance to the High Court for exercise of power of Judicial Review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State, made a submission that as per the Status Report, there are some discrepancies, which all are to be enquired into. 13. The Status Report filed by the fifth respondent-Tahsildar, wherein in paragraphs 14 to 16, it has been stated as under:- “14. It is respectfully submitted further, it is found that the said company India Shoe Exports Private Limited is functioning in S.Nos.153/4B, 153/4C, 153/3B, 153/3C, 153/3D and 153/3E of Ramapuram Village. Further in S.Nos.153/1, 153/2, 153/3A, 153/4A a Multiplex Theatre with 9 Halls is under construction. The said construction is being carried out jointly by Hussainy Trust and A.S.V. Enterprises. 15. It is further respectfully submitted that in the South West portion of S.No.158 an extent of 72.0 Ares of land from and out of the 292.0 Ares is found acquired by the Chennai Metro Rail Limited in Mount Poonamallee Road. Hussainy is now working as the Headmaster of Hussainy Higher Secondary School. On the Western side of this land, the Chennai Metro Rail construction work is under progress. In the remaining land in S.No.157, there is a compound wall together with the school building. In S.No.158, except the portion of land under construction by CMRL, the remaining land is with bushes. 16. On the Western side of this land, the Chennai Metro Rail construction work is under progress. In the remaining land in S.No.157, there is a compound wall together with the school building. In S.No.158, except the portion of land under construction by CMRL, the remaining land is with bushes. 16. It is respectfully submitted that as regards the properties alleged to have been sold in the aforesaid survey fields a perusal of the records shows that the following sales have taken place in the survey numbers: Document Number Survey Number Extent Executant Claimant 3847/1992 dated 16.12.1992 153/3 3488 s.ft. The Hussainy Trust M/s.Farida Holdings Private Limited 3848/1992 dated 16.12.1992 Sale Deed 153/3 153/4 50.0 cents The Hussainy Trust M/s.Delta Shoes Private Limited 3849/1992 dated 16.12.1992 Sale Deed 153/3 21800 s.ft The Hussainy Trust M/s.Farida Holdings Private Limited 3850/1992 dated 16.12.1992 Sale Deed 153/3 21800 s.ft. The Hussainy Trust Chennai Rivera Shoes Pvt. Limited 240/1999 dated 24.02.1999 Sale Deed 153/3, 153/3E 50.0 cents M/s.Farida Holdings Private Limited M/s.India Shoes Exports Private Limited 777/1999 dated 24.06.1999 Sale Deed 153/3 153/3C 153/3E 50.0 cents Chennai Rivera Shoes Private Limited M/s.India Shoes Exports Private Limited 676/2000 dated 29.03.2000 Sale Deed 151/4 153/3 153/3D 153/4 153/4C 14.0 cents M/s.Delta Shoes Private Limited M/s.India Shoes Exports Private Limited 677/2000 dated 29.03.2000 Sale Deed 153/3 153/3B 163/3D 153/4 153/4B 153/4C 8.0 cents 42.0 cents M/s.Farida Holdings Private Limited M/s.India Shoes Exports Private Limited 1134/2017 dated 13.06.2017 Power Document 153/1 153/2 153/3A 153/4A 4.40 acres The Hussainy Trust M/s.A.S.V. Constructions Private Limited 14. The learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the sixth respondent, clarified that there is no proposal for construction of a Cinema Theatre and it is a commercial building, more-specifically for Software Industry. 15. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner raised an objection by stating that the Commercial/IT purposes are for personal gains. 16. This Court is of the considered view that serious allegations are raised by the petitioner. The Status Report filed by the State reveals that certain discrepancies are identified by the Authorities, who have conducted Field Inspection in respect of the subject properties. Thus an elaborate enquiry by affording opportunities to all the parties concerned, are imminent in the interest of justice. 17. The petitioner has mainly raised an issue that the land acquired from a private owner has been now abused for commercial purposes by the private persons. Thus an elaborate enquiry by affording opportunities to all the parties concerned, are imminent in the interest of justice. 17. The petitioner has mainly raised an issue that the land acquired from a private owner has been now abused for commercial purposes by the private persons. The contesting respondents are defending on the ground that there is no delay and the property has not been abused. 18. The learned Additional Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5, 7 and 8, based on the Status Report states that there are certain discrepancies. Thus it is preferable that the Commissioner of Land Administration, Chennai shall conduct an enquiry for the purpose of ascertaining the entire facts and circumstances and to pass appropriate orders by affording opportunities to all the parties concerned. 19. In view of the facts and circumstances, the second respondent-Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005 is directed to conduct an enquiry by affording opportunities to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. If any illegality, irregularity, violations of law are noticed, then all further actions are directed to be initiated in the manner known to law. The second respondent-Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005 is directed to complete the abovesaid exercise within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 20. With the above observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.