9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of the order quashing the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. 2. Legality of the Notification issued under Section 4(1) in the name of a deceased person. 3. Rectification of the mistake in the land acquisition proceedings. Analysis: 1. The Writ Appeal was filed against the order quashing the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. The appellant, being the daughter of the deceased landowner, argued that the Notification under Section 4(1) was issued in the name of the deceased, which was illegal. Despite objections raised during the 5-A enquiry, no corrections were made. The appellant contended that the entire proceedings should be quashed. The Court examined the documents and found that the Notification and Declaration indeed mentioned the deceased as the landowner. The Court agreed that the Notification issued in the name of a dead person rendered the proceedings invalid. 2. Citing precedents like Muthusamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu and other cases, the Court held that proceedings based on a Notice/Notification issued in the name of a deceased person are unsustainable. Consequently, the Court quashed the Notification issued under Section 4(1) dated 14.06.1995. The Writ Appeal was allowed, with no costs imposed. The Court allowed the respondents to proceed with the acquisition by initiating fresh proceedings in compliance with the law, emphasizing the need for rectifying the mistake in all proceedings. 3. The Court acknowledged the appellant's argument that the Notification issued in the deceased person's name was a fundamental error that needed rectification. By following established legal principles and precedents, the Court upheld the appellant's contention and quashed the Notification. The judgment highlighted the importance of ensuring accuracy and legality in land acquisition proceedings, emphasizing the need for proper documentation and compliance with legal requirements to avoid invalidity in such cases.
|
