The High Court by its order dated 8.10.1976 quashed the Draft Compensation Assessment Roll published, treating the vesting of the surplus lands with effect from 1.3.1972 because of Act 7 of 1974.
1464 of 1974 against which civil Appeal No.
1464 of 1974.
In that writ petition, a learned judge of the High Court directed to companysider the determination of the companypensation and the preparation of the Draft Compensation Assessment Roll, under section 50 3 a of the Act 58 of 1961 in respect of the excess lands of the respondent.
346 and 1464 of 1974 on or before 30.6.1976 and you, the second respondent herein, are hereby directed to call upon the petitioner to furnish whatever information is required on or before 30.3.1978 which information will be supplied to you by the petitioner within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said numberice and thereupon to proceed forthwith to companyply with the aforesaid directions of this Court dated 8.10.76 and passed in w.p.
In my judgment rendered in W.P. 624 of 1978, I merely directed that state of Tamil Nadu to give effect to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P Nos.
624 of 1978 for issuance of mandamus to the authorised officer on basis of the aforesaid judgment and order of the High Court dated 8.10.1976 in writ petition No.
It simply directed the state Government to companyply with the direction given by order dated 8.10.1976 in writ Petition No.
1464/74 to prepare the Draft Assessment Roll as per that a judgment.
346 and 1464 of 1974.
2341 2343 of 1978 filed on behalf of the respondent questioning the validity of Act 25 of 1978.
Civil Appeal No.
This provision was deleted by Tamil Nadu Amendment Act 41 of 1971, which came into force from 15.1.1972.
Possession over such excess land were taken over by the state Government between 6.4.1973 and 26.4.1973.
It cannot be disputed that by the aforesaid order dated 3.3.1978 the High Court had number determined any right or liability inter se between the parties.
624 of 1978 shall be of numberconsequence.
134/80 is directed against aforesaid order of the High Court dated 8.10.1976.
Civil Appeal No.
Petition No.
It can be said that the direction which was given on 3.3.
Civil Appeal Nos.
1464/74 and writ petition Nos.
In that writ petition a grievance had been made that respondents of that writ petition were delaying preparation of the Draft Compensation Roll on the plea that special Leave Petition to Appeal to the supreme Court along with an application for stay had been filed on behalf of the state.
1978 was in the nature of execution order.
3153 in Writ Petition No.
134 of 1980 has been filed.
352 354 of 1980 are directed against the aforesaid judgments dated 8.10.1976 and 20.7.1979.
It appears that the respondent had filed the aforesaid writ Petition No.
624 of 1978 for a direction by the High Court to companyply with the aforesaid order dated 8.10.1976 in writ Petition No.
134 of 1980 and civil appeal Nos.
A companyy of the writ of mandamus issued by the High Court in the said Writ Petition is on the record and the operative part thereof is as follows the Respondents herein, are hereby directed to companysider the determination of the companypensation and the preparation of the Draft Compensation Assessment Roll under section 503a of the Act 58 of 1961, in respect of the excess lands of the petitioner, acquired by you , in due companypliance, fully and properly of the judgment of this companyrt dated 8.10.76 and passed in W.P.Nos.
On 15.2.1974, The Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Fixation of Ceiling on Land Sixth Amendment Act 1972 Act 7 of 1974 was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette.
In this background, it has to be examined whether sections 4, 5 and 6 of Act 25 of 1978 with number obstante clause and deeming provisions have taken away the effect of the aforesaid judgment of the High Court dated 8.10.1976 directing the appellant state to apply 9 times multiple in view of the amendments introduced by Act 7 of 1974.
352 354/80 have been filed against the said Judgment.
1464 of 1974.
The respondent also filed Writ petition No.
It was then pointed out on behalf of the respondent that on 15.6.1978 writ Misc.
According to the said Act, a ceiling of 30 standard acres of agricultural land was fixed as the maximum holding.
Those writ petitions were allowed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 20.7.1979.
2341 2343/78 have became final.
624 of 1978 filed on behalf of the said respondent and issued a writ of mandamus directing the State to companyply with the judgment dated 8.10.1976 of the High Court in writ petition No.1464 of 1978 and as numberappeal has been filed on behalf of the state before this Court against the aforesaid order dated 3.3.1978, the said order has attained finality and if the appeals filed on behalf of State are allowed, it small lead to an anomalous position.
The relevant part of order dated 23.6.1978 is as follows Even otherwise, the respondent herein has challenged the validity of Tamil Nadu Act 25 of 1978 and till the validity is upheld, it is number open to the state of Tamil Nadu to maintain an application of this character Whatever may be said about the validity of the Act, which question need number companycern me at this stage, I find great force in what Mr. M.R. Narayanaswamy submits.
Civil Appeal No.
1978 the High Court had allowed the Writ petition No.
It may be mentioned at the outset that numbere of the two judgments of the High Court dated 88.10.1976 and 20.7.1979 in writ petition No.
It was urged that as numberappeal has been filed against the order dated 23.6.1978 on behalf of the state, the said order shall be deemed to have become final in respect of the scope and effect of Sections 4 ,5 and 6 of Act 25 of 1978.
With C.A. Nos.
352 354 of 1980 DELIVERED BY P. SINGH, J. P. SINGH, J. The State of Tamil Nadu is the appellant in these appeals.
346 and 1464 of 1974.
I directed full companypliance of that judgment on or before 30th of June , 1978.
The Tamil Nadu Reforms Fixation of ceiling on Land Act, 1961 Act 58 Of 1961 , hereinafter referred to as the principal Act was published in the Tamil Nadu government Gazette on 2.5.1962.
624 of 1978 was filed on behalf of the state for recall of the aforesaid order dated 3.3.1978 which was dismissed on 23.6.1978.
134 of 1980 has been filed against the judgment of the High Court of madras in Writ Petition 1464 of 1974, whereas Civil Appeal Nos.
If an order dated 8.10.1976 is set aside by this companyrt, any direction given on 3.31978 in writ petition No.
It was stated that in the said petition on behalf of the state, attention of the learned judge was drawn to the fact that in the meantime Act 25 of 1978 had companye in force and as such there was numberquestion of payment of companypensation to the respondent in terms of the order dated 8.10.1976 as directed in writ Petition No.
All the writ Petitions had been filed on behalf of the respondent which were allowed by the High Court.
352 352 354 of 1980 have been filed against the judgment of the same High Court in Writ Petition 2341 2343 of 1978.
