AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The above appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 28.02.2002 in W.P. No. 7743 of
2000, in and by which, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed for questioning the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Tamil
Nadu Act 31 of 1978.
Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
The only contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant was not served the Form-1 notice, which is mandatory as per
Section 4(2) of the Tamil Nadu Act 31 of 1978.
In view of the fact that before the learned single Judge, the respondents have not filed counter affidavit meeting the said aspect, we directed the
learned Government Advocate to secure the relevant records.
Today, the learned Government Advocate, on perusal of the records informs this Court that there is no endorsement or proof to show that
Form-1 notice was served to the petitioner/appellant.
In such circumstances and in view of the fact that the only notice/opportunity available to the land owner is notice under Form-1 u/s 4(2) of the
Act, we have no other option except to quash the acquisition proceedings. The learned single Judge has not adverted to the said aspect.
Accordingly, the order dated 28.02.2002 passed in W.P.No. 7743 of 2000 is set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. However it is made clear that
if the respondents so desire, they are free to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law. No costs. WAMP No. 2283 of 2003 is closed.