R. Ramakrishnan and Others vs Special Tahsildar (Adhi Dravidar Welfare) and The State of Tamilnadu

Mishra, J.—Petitioners herein have asked for the quashing of the notification u/s 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, the notification dated

27.2.1985 reads as follows: G.O. Ms. No. 497, Social Welfare, 27th February, 1985.

No. II (2) SW./1458/85 - whereas, it appears to the Govt. of Tamilnadu that the lands specified below and situated in Vallam Village, Gingee

Taluk, South Arcot district are needed for a public purpose, to wit for the provision of pathway to burial ground to the Adhi Dravidars of Vallam

Village, Gingee Taluk, South Arcot District, notice to that effect is hereby given to all to whom it may concern in accordance with the provisions of

Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act 1 of 1894).

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the said. Act, the Governor of Tamilnadu hereby

authorises me Special Tansildar (Adhi Dravidar Welfare) Gingee, his staff and workmen, to exercise the powers conferred by the said Sub-

section, and under Clause (c) of Section 3 of the said Act. The Governor of Tamilnadu hereby appoints the Special Tahsildar (Adhi Dravidar

Welfare), Gingee, to perform the functions of a Collector u/s 5-A of the said Act.

Petitioners herein, 14 in number, have alleged that the lands belong to them and they have been using the same for cultivation and raising crops,

the only source of livelihood for them being cultivation. The village in which they live consists of caste Hindus and Harijans. The people cremate or

bury dead bodies according to their custom on the river bed of Varakanadi river. They have attached with the affidavit a sketch map showing that

both the caste Hindus and Harijans carried the dead bodies, to the river bed through a pathway and,

There has been no occasion for any objection or obstruction from any source for carrying the dead bodies by the Harijans through the existing

pathway.

According to the Petitioners, only at the instance of the Harijans of the village, the Government has issued the impugned notification, allegedly for a

pathway to the burial ground of Adhi Dravidars of the village. According to the Petitioners, there is no public purpose behind the acquisition and if

there is a creation of a pathway to the burial ground of Adhi Dravidars, it is created more for the reason of politics than for the reason of

exigencies. The Act permits acquisition of land for public purpose which is defined to include the provision of village-sites, or the extension,

planned development or improvement of existing village sites. It is possible in a given cafe to point cut that a pathway to the burial ground is

provided to serve a public purpose if it is intended as a planned development or improvement of the exiting, village sites.

There is no counter affidavit filed in the instant case. It is, therefore, not possible to accept even as a fact already traversed by the Respondents

that it was for the extension or planned development or improvement of the existing village site, that the acquisition has been made. Since a

pathway in a village will come only under the aforementioned category and not under any other category of public purpose, unless it is shown by

the Respondents that they have intended the acquisition for the aforementioned purpose, they cannot be permitted to acquire such lands. The

petition, for the said reason, has to succeed. It is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned notification afore-quoted is quashed. Consequently, the

Respondents are restrained from acquiring the Petitioners lands under the said notification. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.