JUDGMENT - PALSHIKAR V.G., J.:---By this petition the petitioner which is a Government of India undertaking company established by Government of India under the Companies Act, has challenged the proceedings for land acquisition taken up by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (14), Pune in respect of lands owned on acquisition by the Company, the acquisition by the Company itself being done under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

2. The petitioner-Company has been declared as sick industrial unit as per the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as "S.I.C.A." on 31-3-97.

3. In May, 1998 Collector, Pune published in Official Gazette a notification under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the "Act" for acquiring some of the lands of the petitioner-company. On 26-11-1998 a notification under section 9, sub-sections (3) and (4) was issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (14), Pune hereinafter referred to as "SLAO". The petitioner-company pointed out to the SLAO that it is a sick industrial unit and the acquisition should not be proceeded with. Ultimately on 3-1-2000 notice under section 12(2) of the Act was forwarded to the petitioner with a copy of the Award made and its translation. When notice of delivery of possession was issued the present petition was filed challenging the entire proceedings for acquisition of lands taken up under the Act.

4. It is pertinent to note that the proceedings were commenced in the year 1998 and were completed in the year 2000 and throughout these two years though the petitioner had complete knowledge of the proceedings taken up under the Act no challenge of any kind was made before this Court or any other Appropriate Court. From the facts noted in the petition it appears that no objection in writing was taken before L.A.O. However a communication dated 8-12-1998 was written to the L.A.O. pointed out the provisions of section 22 of S.I.C.A. and therefore seeking that the proceedings cannot continue. By this very letter the land was sought to be valued at Rs. 4500/- per sq. mtr. and compensation was claimed at the rate of 5000 per sq. mtr. subject to the L.A.O. obtaining consent from Board for Industrial Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) for acquisition of this land as required by section 22-A of the S.I.C.A. It appears that this aspect was taken into consideration and award under section 12 of the Act was made. It was after making of the award and receipt of copy thereof that the present petition has been filed contending that the entire proceedings for acquisition of land under the Act are void ab initio for want of consent from the BIFR was not obtained.

5. The respondent-State and L.A.O. have strongly denied this contention that section 22 of S.I.C.A. is applicable to proceedings for acquisition under the Act and therefore they defend the action claiming to be legal and valid.

6. The only question which arises for consideration in the circumstances is what is scope and extent of section 22 of S.I.C.A. under which prior permission is required to be obtained from the BIFR for initiating any proceedings in respect of sick industry. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a sick industry. The only question therefore is whether on proper consideration of the provisions of section 22 of S.I.C.A. the proceedings were void ab initio.

7. In order to consider this contention it would be necessary for us to note what exactly is provided by S.I.C.A. This Act was passed by the Indian Parliament keeping in mind certain aims and objects. It was legislated to consider the ill effects of sickness in industrial companies such as loss of production, loss of employment, loss of revenue to the Central and State Governments and locking up of investible funds of banks and financial institutions. It was therefore considered imperative by Government to revive and revital and rehabilitate the potentially viable sick industria

Click Here to Read the rest of this document