High Court of Calcutta
B. Bhattacharya, Aniruddha Bose, Sambuddha Chakrabarti, JJ.
State of West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Sabita Mondal – Respondent
F.M.A. No. 486 of 2007, F.M.A. No. 798 Of 2007, F.M.A. No. 41 of 2008, F.M.A. No. 90 of 2009
Decided on : Jun 17, 2011
LAND ACQUISITION ACT - SUB-SECTION (3B) OF SECTION 9 - NOTICES UNDER SECTION 4(1A) OF THE WEST BENGAL LAND (REQUISITION AND ACQUISITION) ACT, 1948 - LAPSE OF NOTICES BY REASON OF INSERTION OF SECTION 7A IN THE ACT OF 1948 - PROVISIONS OF SECTION 9(3B) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION (WEST BENGAL AMENDMENT) ACT, 1997 - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
Notices under Section 4(1a) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 were issued in various cases. No award was declared under Section 7 of the said Act on or before March 31, 1995. Subsequently, notices were issued under Section 9(3B) of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997. The question arose whether the lapsed notices earlier issued under Section 4(1a) of the Act 2 of 1948 can be revived by issuing a notice under sub-section (3B) of Section 9 of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997.
Finding of the Court:
1. The notices under Section 4(1a) of the Act of 1948 which were issued prior to March 31, 1992 and in respect of which no award had been passed by March 31, 1995, had already lapsed and by the Amendment Act 1997 of the Land Acquisition Act by the West Bengal Legislature, no provision has been made for revival of the lapsed notices which stood lapsed already on March 31, 1997 for non-compliance of the provision of Amendment Act of 1996. 2. By the Amendment Act of 1997 only those notices under sub-section (1a) of Section 4 which would have lapsed on the midnight of March 31, 1997 or on subsequent dates, have been saved.
Issues: Whether by issuing a notice under sub-section (3B) of Section 9 of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997, the lapsed notices earlier issued under Section 4(1a) of the Act 2 of 1948 can be revived.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Amendment Act of 1996 cast a duty upon the Collector to make an award under sub-Section (2) of Section 7 within a period of three years from the date of publication of the notice in the Official Gazette under sub-section (1a) of Section 4 and if such award is not made within the period as aforesaid, the said notice should lapse. 2. The effect of the LAND ACQUISITION (WEST BENGAL AMENDMENT) ACT, 1997 which came into operation on the midnight between March 31, 1997 and April 1, 1997 prevented all those notices under sub-section (1a) of Section 4 issued after April 1, 1994 from being lapsed by giving scope of revival by way of a notice under sub-section (3B) of Section 9 of the said Act if award had not been passed within three years from the date of publication of such notice and which would otherwise lapse if the said Act of 1997 would not come into operation at the midnight of March 31,1997.
Final Decision: 1. The appeals filed by the State are dismissed, and the order passed by the learned Single Judge is affirmed. 2. In F.M.A. No.90 of 2009 (Samir Kumar Das and others v. State of West Bengal and others), the State is given an opportunity to find out the alleged notice under sub-section (1 a) of Section 4 of the Act. If it appears that such a notice was issued prior to March 31, 1992, the same should be treated to have lapsed and the State shall give fresh notice under Section 9(3A) of the Act and will, proceed accordingly. 3. If it appears that by following the principles laid down by the Court in these cases, the notice under sub-section (1a) of Section 4 has not lapsed the compensation should be calculated on the basis of the valuation as on that date of such notice. 4. At any rate, fresh award should be passed in accordance with law within six months from the date of the judgment.
Bhattacharya, J.
1. TWO different Benches of this Court having taken a view contrary to the one earlier taken by another Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Soumendra Mohan Dey, reported in ILR [2003] 1 Cal 410, these four matters have been assigned to us by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.
2. THE first three cases have been referred by a Division Bench consisting of Ashim Kumar Banerjee and Tapas Kumar Giri, JJ., while the fourth matter has been referred by another Division Bench of Ashim Kumar Banerjee and Prasenjit Mandal, JJ. The facts giving rise to filing of these references may be summed up separately : F.M.A. No.486 of 2007 State of West Bengal and Ors. versus Smt. Sabita Mondal and Ors.
3. THIS appeal is directed against the order dated January 16,2002 passed by Justice Dilip Kumar Seth in W.P. No. 13189 (W) of 2001. By the said order, His Lordship held that in view of the decision in W.P. No. 17107 (W) of 2000 (Sabitri Devi and Ors. v. The State of West Bengal and Ors.), the notice issued under Section 9(3B) of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997 should be treated as one under Section 9(3A) and the compensation should be made accordingly.
4. IN this case, the possession of the property was taken in the year 1967 under the provisions of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (West Bengal Act II of 1948). Notification under Section 4(1 a) of the said Act was published on January 10,1981. No award was declared under Section 7 of the said Act on or before March 31, 1995. Subsequently, a notice was issued under Section 9(3B) of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997 in the year 2000 intimating that the compensation would be assessed on the basis of the value of the land as on January 10,1981 I.e. the date of reference for the purpose of determining the value of the land. The said notice was challenged in the writ-petition. F.M.A. No.798 of 2007 State of West Bengal and Ors. Versus Smt. Sabitri Devi and Ors. This appeal is directed against the order dated December 24, 2001 passed by Justice Dilip Kumar Seth in W.P. No. 17107 (W) of 2000 (Sabitri Devi and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.). By the said order, His Lordship held that the notice under Section 4(1a) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (West Bengal Act II of 1948) was issued two years before 31st March, 1994 but the award was not declared on or before 31st March, 1995 and as such, the notice should lapse by reason of insertion of Section 7A in the Act of 1948 and the notices under Section 4(1a) which survived on March 31, 1997 would not lapse. His Lordship further held that in the cases where the notices under Section 4(1a) of the 1948 Act stood lapsed on 31st March, 1997, the provisions of Section 9(3B) of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997 would not be attracted and it would be attracted only to the cases where the notices under Section 4(1a) of the 1948 Act survived on 31st March, 1997 and in all other cases, Section 9(3A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would apply. Accordingly, His Lordship held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice under Section 4(1a) of 1948 Act having lapsed before 31st March, 1997, the provisions Of Section 9(3B) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 of the West Bengal amendment was not applicable and the compensation was to be calculated on the basis of notice under Section 9(3A) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as was issued. His Lordship quashed the notice under Section 9 (3B) of 1894 Act.
5. IN this case, the possession of the property was taken in the year 1975-76 under the West Bengal Act II of 1948. Notice under Section 4(1a) of 1948 Act was published on 7th March, 1981. No award was declared under Section 7 of the said Act on or before 31 st March, 1995. Subsequently, a notice under Section 9(3A) was issued on 18.3.1999. Thereafter, another notice under Section 9(3B) was iss
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.