The Madras High Court today upheld the constitutional validity of a Tamil Nadu law which provides reconveyance or transfer of an acquired property back to the original owner.
Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sathyanaryaan, who made it clear that they took note of certain defects and possible misuse of Section 48-B in Land Acquisition (Tamil Nadu Amendments) Act, 1996, said "it is for the State Legislature to consider whether it wants to continue with the same provision on the statue book or not and whether it needs any amendment or not in view of the perceived defects in implementation or possibility of misuse."
The matter relates to a PIL filed by an anti-corruption organisation seeking to declare the Section 48B, which paves the way to reconvey the lands acquired by the government back to the land owners which are not utilized for the purpose of which it was acquired, as unconstitutional.
The bench, after referring to various judgments of Supreme Court and High Courts, in its order said, "the state legislature in its wisdom, deemed it proper by amending the provisions to introduce Section 48 B as a measure of relief to the owners whose lands were acquired, possession taken but yet remained unutilized for a long period of time."
The bench, however, made it clear that with regard to the amount to be paid - whether market value at times of reconveyance or at least interest on such amounts as a principle of equity - would have no bearing on the constitutional validity of Section 48B.
The bench, which refused to declare the section as unconstitutional, in its order said "no enactment could be struck down by just saying it is arbitrary and unreasonable without going into dual test one legislative competence and another violation of fundamental rights".
