TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 94
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the Writ Petitioner who approached this Court for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash G.O.Ms.No.34 dated 17.11.2009 and G.O.Ms.No.42 dated 04.12.2009. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for effective adjudication of the Writ Appeal are as follows: The Writ Petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, owning lands in Kirumambakkam Village, Bahour Commune, Puducherry, having purchased the same for valuable sale consideration. Subsequent to the purchase, the petitioner applied for transfer of patta in its name which came to be rejected by the Tahsildar, Bahour. An appeal was preferred before the District Collector who remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar for reconsi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the relevant date of acquisition and there was also no necessity to invoke urgency clause since the acquisition was only for the purpose of constructing a residential school. These irregularities had seriously prejudiced the petitioner and therefore the petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking to quash the entire land acquisition proceedings, in so far as it relate to the petitioner. 3. The Deputy Collector cum Land Acquisition Officer filed a counter stating that the lands were acquired at the instance of Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Puducherry for the purpose of constructing a residential school. Sec.4(1) notification was duly published in daily newspapers having vide circulation in the locality. Subsequently Sec.6 declaration was al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dismissal of the Writ Petition, the petitioner company has preferred the above Writ Appeal, challenging the order of the learned single Judge on the grounds that despite the award being passed, no further steps have been taken to utilize the land and that the learned single Judge has not properly appreciated the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Darshan lal Nagpal Vs. Govt (NCT Delhi) reported in (2012) 2 SCC 327. 7. Heard Mr.M.S.Seshadri, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.S.Tamilvanan, AGP (P) for the respondents 1 to 3, Mr.B.Ramana Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arun Kumar, junior Standing counsel for the respondents 4 and 5. 8. During the course of hearing of the Writ Appeal, the respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titlement of the land owner is to get compensation and there is no inherent right for the land owner to seek to quash the land acquisition proceedings and consequently reclaim his property. In the present case, we notice that Sec.4(1) notification was dated 17.11.2009 subsequently Sec.6 declaration was also made on 14.12.2009 and the award also came to be passed within one year viz., on 16.06.2010. It is also the specific case of respondents that possession was also taken on 25.02.2010. The Writ Petition came to be filed only in April 2011, contending that petitioner company had no notice of the acquisition proceedings. It is also contended by the counsel for the appellant that the name of the petitioner company is reflected in the encumbra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the State has discretion to put the said lands to use for any public purpose that it may deem fit and proper. Therefore, the contentions raised in the Writ Appeal do not merit any consideration. The learned single Judge has addressed all issues that arose in the Writ Petition including the invocation of the urgency clause as well as the issue regarding non issuance of notice to the petitioner company by the land acquisition authority. 13. Therefore, we do not deem it fit to interfere with the well reasoned order of the learned single Judge. However, considering the fact that there have been subsequent developments with regard to the income tax proceedings and this Court allowing tax appeals filed by the petitioner company and remitting ....