Paramasivampillai vs The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition)

C.S. Karnan, J.—The revision Petitioners/plaintiffs have filed the above revisions to direct the Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), Periyakulam to dispose of the E.P. Nos. 18, 19 and 20 of 2007 and E.P. No. 28 of 2010 in L.A.O.P. No. 25 of 1993 respectively pending before the said court in a fixed time.

The short facts of the case are as follows:

The Respondent/Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Adi-dravida Welfare Department, Theni had issued 4(1) notification on 26.11.1989 for acquiring the revision Petitioners'' land under Land Acquisition Act for neighborhood scheme for the Adi-dravida people. As per land acquisition proceedings, the lands were acquired and award was passed on 01.08.1991. Aggrieved by the said award, the land owners have filed LAOP No. 25 of 1993 before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam. The learned Judge directed the Land Acquisition Officer to pay an enhanced compensation of a sum of Rs. 1,100/- per cent. The said order was passed on 17.03.2005.

Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Officer has not complied with the said award passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam. Hence, the land owners/claimants have filed execution proceedings in E.P. Nos. 18, 19 and 20 of 2007 and E.P. No. 28 of 2010 in L.A.O.P. No. 25 of 1993 respectively, which is pending on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam. Under the circumstances, the revision Petitioners has filed the above revision petitions for early disposal.

The Learned Counsel for the revision Petitioners argued that the revision Petitioners'' land had been acquired by the Respondent in the year 1989. But, so far, the compensation amount had not been settled ever after a lapsed of 20 years. So, the aggrieved revision Petitioners has approached this Court for speedy disposal of the E.P. proceedings. The Learned Counsel further argued that the original award amount was not adequate, and hence they had approached the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam by way of LAOP No. 25 of 1993. The learned Judge has enhanced the compensation for their land. Against his order, no appeal or revision is field/pending. Thereafter, the award can be executed at the earliest.

The Learned Counsel for the Respondent argued that it was an admitted fact that the land was acquired by the Respondent. The learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam had enhanced the compensation to a sum of Rs. 1,100/- per cent, in his order in LAOP No. 25 of 1993 dated 17.03.2005. The said judgment and decree has been challenged by the Land Acquisition Officer before this Court, which is pending as AS.SR. No. 7712 of 2010.

The Learned Counsel further argued that the Respondent is taking steps for challenging the award passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam. Hence, the Learned Counsel has sought for six months time to sort out the issue.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels on either side, and on perusing the connected records, this Court is of the considered opinion that speedy disposal is absolutely necessary, since the land was acquired 20 years ago. Therefore, this Court directs the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Periyakulam to dispose the E.P. Proceedings in E.P. Nos. 18, 19 and 20 of 2007 and E.P. No. 28 of 2010 in L.A.O.P. No. 25 of 1993 respectively within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly ordered.

In the result, the above civil revision petitions are disposed of with the above observation. There is no order as to costs.