SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 901

2011 (6) Supreme 711
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.S. Singhvi and H.L. Dattu, JJ.
Lalrinvenga (Dead) Through L.Rs. and another — Appellants
versus
State of Mizoram and others — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7825 of 2011
(Arising out of SLP(C) No.18850 of 2006)
Decided on : 13-9-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
The question whether the notification issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in the Official Gazette is a question of fact and such question cannot be decided on assumptions and conjectures or inferences.
2. Whenever the acquisition of land is challenged on the ground that the notification has not been published as per the mandate of the statute, authority defending the acquisition is under an obligation to produce evidence in the form of documents to prove that the requirement of publication has been complied. In the absence of such evidence, Court cannot decide challenge to the acquisition proceedings by assuming that particular notification had been published as per the requirement of law.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894- Section 4(1) -Appeal against the judgment of Division Bench of High Court whereby appeal preferred by the respondents against the order of Single Judge was allowed and it was declared that Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of appellants after the publication of declaration issued under Section 6(1) of Act, 1894 and notification prohibiting allotment of land to any private individual would not confer any right upon them to claim compensation in respect of acquired land- Section 4 of Act makes it clear that notification issued by an appropriate Government proposing the acquisition of land must be published in the Official Gazette and two daily newspapers having wide circulation in the locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language- Division Bench upheld acquisition of land by assuming that notification issued under Section 4(1) must have been published in the Official Gazette - Said approach of High Court was clearly erroneous- Instantly , no material was produced to show that notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act had been published in the Official Gazette-Hence, High Court was not justified in declining relief to appellants by assuming that the said notification must have been published in the Official Gazette- Impugned judgment set aside and order passed by Single Judge restored-Appeal allowed. (Para 13)

        Land Acquisition Act, 1894- Section 6(1)- Appeal against the judgment of Division Bench of High Court whereby appeal preferred by the respondents against the order of Single Judge was allowed and it was declared that Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of appellants after the publication of declaration issued under Section 6(1) of Act, 1894 and notification prohibiting allotment of land to any private individual would not confer any right upon them to claim compensation in respect of acquired land-Held Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of the appellants could not have been cancelled on the ground that same were issued without the sanction or approval of competent authority- The respondents had not controverted the appellants’ assertion that vide order dated 18.1.1983, respondent No.2 had authorised the Assistant Settlement Officer-II to process and decide the applications for grant of the Land Settlement Certificates- No dispute that the appellants had purchased land in 1984 and the Settlement Officer had issued the Land Settlement Certificates in 1987 after duly scrutinizing the applications made for that purpose- This action of the concerned officer was not in violation of order dated 14.6.1985 vide which allotment of land to private individuals was restricted/freezed along the main National Highway and the road leading to old Zokhawsang village which was earmarked for shifting of First Assam Rifles- Indeed, it was neither the pleaded case of the respondents before High Court nor any evidence was produced to show that land in question had been allotted to appellants by any public authority-Impugned judgment set aside and the order passed by Single Judge restored-Appeal allowed. (Paras 14, 15)

JUDGMENT

G.S. Singhvi, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court whereby the appeal preferred by the respondents against the order of the learned Single Judge was allowed and it was declared that Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of the appellants after the publication of declaration issued under Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) and notification dated 14.6.1985 prohibiting allotment of land to any private individual will not confer any right upon them to claim compensation in respect of the acquired land.

3. The appellants purchased land measuring 11.37 bighas from Dangliana to whom Periodic Patta No. 40/81 is said to have been granted under Rule 6 of the Mizo District (Agricultural Land) Rules, 1971. They submitted applications to Director, Land Revenue and Settlement, Mizoram (respondent No.2) who had issued order dated 18.1.1983 authorising Assistant Settlement Officer-II to decide such applications for grant of Land Settlement Certificates. After considering the applications, the Settlement Officer issued certificates bearing Nos.AZ-2279 of 1987 and AZ-2278 of 1987 in favour of the appellants under Section II of the Mizo District (Land Revenue) Act, 1956.

4. In the meanwhile, the State Government issued notification dated 14.5.1985 under Section 4(1) of the Act for the acquisition of land in villages old Beraw and Zokhawsang for a public purpose, namely, allotment to the Assam Rifles in lieu of the site occupied by them in Aizawl town. After one month, the State Government issued order dated 14.6.1985 and imposed restriction on the allotment of land to private persons along the main National Highway and the road going to old Zokhawsang Village.

5. Another notification was issued on 13.8.1987 under Section 4(1) for the acquisition of area between the site allotted to the Church for locating Theological College and N.H.-54 Aizawl-Lunglei Road at Lokhawsang for allotting the same to the Assam Rifles. The declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act was published in Mizoram Gazette dated 20.11.1987. Land Acquisition Collector, Aizawl passed an award sometime in July/August 1988 for payment of compensation of Rs.92,59,156/-.

6. As a sequel to initiation of the acquisition proceedings, the State Government directed respondent No.2 to cancel the Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of the appellants and others on the ground that the same were issued without the approval and sanction of the competent authority and in violation of Government Notification No. LRR/B-40/84-85/19 dated 14.5.1985 and Order No. LRR/B-40/84-85/21 dated 14.6.1985. Thereupon, respondent No.2 passed order dated 8.8.1988 and declared that the Land Settlement Certificates issued in favour of the appellants were invalid.

7. The appellants challenged the acquisition proceedings in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which was registered as Civil Rule No. 3943 of 1994. They also prayed for quashing of order dated 8.8.1988 issued by respondent No.2 and for issue of a mandamus to the respondents to pay full compensation with interest and solatium in lieu of the acquisition of their land. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it was pleaded that order dated 14.6.1985 was issued by the State Government because after publication of notification dated 14.5.1985, the writ petitioners and other similarly situated persons had connived with some unscrupulous officers and were trying to convert their agricultural passes into Land Settlement Certificates or get fresh permanent settlement so that they could claim compensation. It was further pleaded that declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act was published in the Mizoram Gazette dated 1.10.1985 and also in the local newspapers. The cancellation of the Land Settlement Certificates was justified on the premise that the same were issued without the s












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top