Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications Tuesday, Dec 16, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version | Audio | Blogs |
|
|
|
|
|
Industry & Economy
-
Courts/Legal Issues States - Tamil Nadu Withdrawal of exemption to industrial unit illegal: HC Our Legal Correspondent Chennai, Dec. 15 The Madras High Court has held that withdrawal of exemption granted by the Tamil Nadu Government under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1978 to an industrial unit was illegal as the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 had already come into force from June 16, 1999. By virtue of the Repeal Act, if the possession of land was already in the hands of the land owner, then he could not be deprived of the land, the Court had ruled. Setting aside the order dated October 9, 2000 of Revenue Department withdrawing the exemption granted under the Urban Land Ceiling law to Chennai-based V.S.T. Motors Ltd, Mr Justice K. Chandru said though the impugned order stated that it was passed under Section 3(1) (b) of the Repeal Act, such a power did not exist in favour of the respondent (Secretary, Revenue Department). The legal position, the Judge noted, had been enlightened by this Court in A. Joseph Louis & another vs. State of Tamil Nadu & others [2004 (3) L.W 208]. According to the petitioner, who was running a chamber of brick works, they were granted the exemption by Revenue Department under G.O. No. 500 dated April 11, 1986. The Special Commissioner of Land Reforms gave a report that the purpose for which exemption was granted was not being utilised, and therefore, the exemption order should be recalled. The respondent passed the present order withdrawing the exemption. Citing the A. Joseph case, the Judge said a combined reading of Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of the Repeal Act made it clear that unless possession had already been taken by Government after payment of entire compensation, the State would not have jurisdiction to retain the land. Since in the present case, neither possession had been taken, nor compensation paid, there was no jurisdiction for the State or any other authority to pass the impugned order. In the light of above, the writ petition was allowed setting aside the impugned order. More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | Real Estate & Construction | Tamil Nadu
Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu Business Line
|