Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version | Audio | Blogs

News
Features
Stocks
Cross Currency
Shipping
Archives
Google

Group Sites

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




Stories in this Section
Foggy morning


Migrant resource centre launched
Withdrawal of exemption to industrial unit illegal: HC
Fiscal stimulus: Centre trying to effect rebound in demand
Advance tax outflow infuses volatility in market
‘India, West Asia important contributors to world trade’
Airlines non-committal on fare reduction
Truckers’ strike
GSK sees big role for Indian cos in R&D
Mega Power Policy under review: Shinde
Secondary steel makers seek protection
Small and medium units get special package from PSBs
B.S. Raghavan appointed ICFAI university Chancellor
MedTree plans birth hospitals with ‘5-star’ care
Kerala Builders Forum to hold property expo
Home loan package: Most realtors disappointed
New housing package: Limited benefit for listed realty players
Public sector banks cut rates on new home loans
Paper manufacturers pass on benefit of excise duty cuts
Health summit
Vegoil imports rise 30% in Nov on lower global prices
LS panel absolves MPs in ‘cash for votes’ scam


Brandline



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