Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Ruma Pal, J.
Santosh Kumar Chakraborty & Ors.
vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Matter No. 3614 of 1994
Decided On: December 11, 1995
LAND ACQUISITION - WEST BENGAL LAND (REQUISITION AND ACQUISITION) ACT, 1948 - LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - SECTIONS 4, 5A, 6, 7, 11, 17, 39, 40, 41, 42 - NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 - DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 6 - ORDER OF ACQUISITION UNDER SECTION 7 - POSSESSION UNDER SECTION 17 - AGREEMENT BETWEEN COMPANY AND APPROPRIATE GOVERNMENT UNDER SECTION 41 - PUBLICATION OF AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 42 - ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR COMPANY - PROCEDURE - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the acquisition of their land for a public purpose. The notification was also issued under Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act, which empower the State Government to dispense with the provisions of Section 5A and take possession of the land in cases of urgency. The petitioners contended that the notification was invalid as it was not in compliance with the provisions of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the impugned notification was invalid for the following reasons: 1. The notification was issued by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, which had nothing to do with the purpose for which the land was being acquired. 2. The notification was a combined notification under Sections 4, 17(1), and 17(4) of the Act, which was not permissible. 3. No declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made before taking possession of the land. 4. No urgency was shown to justify the use of the emergent powers under Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act. 5. Possession of the land was taken without tendering or making payment in terms of Section 17(3-A) of the Act. 6. No enquiry was held under Section 40 of the Act to determine the need for acquisition. 7. No agreement was entered into between the appropriate Government and the company as required under Section 41 of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was valid. 2. Whether the State Government could dispense with the provisions of Section 5A of the Act and take possession of the land in cases of urgency. 3. Whether the acquisition of land for a company was valid without the consent of the appropriate Government and an agreement between the company and the Government.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the notification was invalid as it was not in compliance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court interpreted the provisions of the Act and held that: 1. A notification under Section 4 of the Act must be issued by the appropriate Government. 2. A declaration under Section 6 of the Act must be made before taking possession of the land. 3. The State Government can dispense with the provisions of Section 5A of the Act only in cases of urgency. 4. Possession of the land can be taken under Section 17(1) of the Act only after tendering or making payment in terms of Section 17(3-A) of the Act. 5. An enquiry must be held under Section 40 of the Act to determine the need for acquisition. 6. An agreement must be entered into between the appropriate Government and the company as required under Section 41 of the Act.
Final Decision: The Court set aside and quashed the impugned notification and directed the respondents to make over possession of the land in question to the petitioners within 6 weeks from the date of communication of the judgment.
Ruma Pal, J.: None appeared on behalf of the added respondent, viz. North Bengal State Transport Corporation (NBSTC) after service. No affidavit-in-opposition has also been filed by the State-respondents although it appears that a copy of the affidavit-in-opposition was served by the respondents on the petitioner. I am, therefore, disposing of the application on the basis of the materials before me including the copy of the State respondents' affidavit handed over to Court by the petitioner.
2. The facts of the case relate to premises No. 73 and 73/1/2A, Bagmari Road, Calcutta (referred to as 'the' premises'). The petitioner No. 1 had purchased the premises in 1971. The premises were sought to be requisitioned under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 1948 Act'). The purpose of such requisition was stated for the purpose of maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the community and for increasing employment opportunities along with other facilities by construction of a civic centre in C.I.T. Scheme No. VIII. The area covered was 5 Cottas 4 sq.ft. being prevalent to 0.962 acres or 0.0389 hectre. The possession was handed over by the petitioner No. 1 to the State Authority. The petitioner No.2 agreed to purchase the land from the petitioner No. 1 for Rs. 32 lakhs on April 30, 1993. The petitioner No. 2 has paid amount of six lakhs towards such purchase money. On September 6, 1993 the petitioner No.2 made a representation for derequisition of the land and for rent compensation and by an order dated 1/4th October, 1993 the land was released from requisition. This derequisition was made after the land had been kept in the possession of the Government for about 18 years.
3. On May 20, 1994 possession of the land was handed over by the State Authorities to the petitioners. On September 7, 1994 the State embarked on a fresh course of action to deprive the petitioners of their rights to the lands. According to the respondents on July 26, 1894 a notification was issued under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) which was published in the newspapers. The Official translation of the notice reads as follows:-
Calcutta No. 2161 LA(2)/Health and Family Welfare dated 26.7.1994. As it appears to the Governor that the land in premises No. 73 Bagmari Road, Calcutta, in ward No. 32 P.S. Ultadanga District Calcutta namely North Bengal State Transport Corporation under the Transport Department of the Government of West Bengal may be required in the public interest for its modern Terminating Bus Depot therefore it is hereby notified that more or less 00389 Hector (00962 Acre) land in the above mentioned ward described in the Schedule hereunder written may be required for the aforesaid public interest at the cost of the Govt.
This notice is given to all concerned under section 4 of Act 1 of 1894 and also according to the aforesaid notification.
A plan of this land may be seen in the office of the 1 st Land Acquisition Collector, at No.5, Bankshall Street.
By the power conferred to the aforesaid section the Governor hereby authorise the officers their employees and workers of the said Corporation to enter survey and do all other acts in the land required in accordance with the said section.
This direction is made by the power conferred upon the Governor under s. 17.(4) of Act I of 1894 that as the provisions of s. 17(1) is applicable to the land described in the Schedule hereunder written, the provisions of s. 5(4) is not applicable.
SCHEDULE
P. S. Ultadanga, District Calcutta Total are-60962 Acre, 00389 Hector.
BOUNDERY
In the North : Acquired land of C. I. T. which has been handed over to the North Bengal State Transport Corporation.
On the West : 40 ft. wide C. I. T. Road.
On the South : The acquired land of C. I. T. which has been handed over to North Bengal State Transport Corporation.
On the East : The acquired land of C. I. T. which has
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
