Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
JAY SENGUPTA, J.
Dilip Kumar Ghosal – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others – Respondents
WPA 10293 of 2015
Decided on : 22-06-2023
LAND ACQUISITION - REPEAL OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 - APPLICABILITY - LAND ACQUISITION INITIATED UNDER WEST BENGAL LAND (REQUISITION AND ACQUISITION) ACT, 1948, SUBSEQUENTLY ACQUIRED UNDER LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - NO AWARD PASSED DURING EITHER ACT - FRESH PROCEEDING UNDER RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, MANDATORY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner's land was acquired in 1978 for road widening under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948. No award was passed during the lifetime of the Act. Subsequently, the land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but no award was passed under that Act either, before its repeal in 2014. In 2014, the petitioner was served with a notice under the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1999, which was a dead Act. The petitioner challenged the notice, contending that a fresh proceeding should be initiated under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the notice issued under the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1999 was illegal and void, as the Act had already been repealed. The court further held that the respondents ought to have initiated a fresh proceeding under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, as the land had already been utilized and could not be returned.
Issues: 1. Whether the notice issued under the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1999 was valid and legal. 2. Whether the respondents were required to initiate a fresh proceeding under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which provides that the Act shall apply to all land acquisition proceedings initiated on or after the commencement of the Act. 2. The court also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. Sabita Mondal, wherein it was held that notices under Section 4(1a) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, 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 could not be revived by any subsequent amendment.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondent authorities to treat the impugned notice as lapsed and to initiate a fresh proceeding under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and compensate the petitioner in terms of such Act at the earliest, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of the order.
JUDGMENT :
Jay Sengupta, J.:
1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction upon the respondents to rescind and/or withdraw the notice dated 02.05.2014 and to pay compensation as per the new Act of 2013 by initiating a fresh proceeding after treating the earlier proceeding being Case No. R.A.-44/77-78 as lapsed.
2. Mr. Pan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted as follows. The petitioner is the owner of R.S. Plot Nos. 1696, 2356, 2199 and 1721 measuring an area of about 0.12 acre, 0.06 acre, 0.08 acre and 0.10 acre respectively (hereinafter referred to as ‘the said land’) and the said land is situated within Mouza – Kandra, J.L. No. 114, presently under Police Station – Salar, District – Murshidabad. For providing proper facilities for transport and communication, viz. widening of Salar-Bharatpur Road the 4th and 5th kilometre in the district of Murshidabad, the Collector being the respondent no. 2 herein, initiated a proceeding under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Act II of 1948), at present expired, bearing Case No. R.A. – 44/77-78 and the possession of the said land was taken over on 28th April, 1978, upon an order under sub-Section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act II 1948. Subsequently, the said land was acquired upon publication of a notification under Sub Section (1a) of the Section 4 of the West Bengal Land (Acquisition and Requisition) Act, 1948 (Act II of 1948) and the said notification was published in the Calcutta Gazette on 27.09.1982. During pendency of the aforesaid proceeding, the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) (Amendment) Act, 1994 came into force on and from 31st March 1994 and by the said Amendment Act Section 3 of the Principal Act (Act II of 1948) was omitted with effect from 1st April 1994 and in view of such omission power to requisition under Section 3 of Act II of 1948 was taken away with effect from 1st April 1994. However, the life of the said Act II of 1948 was extended till 31st March 1997. Subsequently, the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Act II of 1948), since expired, was further amended on 8th October 1996 and by virtue of Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) (Amendment) Act, 1996 (West Bengal Act XXV of 1996), Section 7A was inserted after Section 7 of the Principal Act. In view of insertion of Section 7A, the said notice/notification under Section 4(1a) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 dated 27.09.1982 in connection with the said proceeding stood lapsed, as no award could be made on or before 31st March 1995 and thereby, the said land reverted back under requisition from acquisition and was under requisition till 31st March 1997. By the said amendment, Section 9 of the Principal Act, namely Act I of 1894 was amended by which sub-section (3B) was inserted. Furthermore, by such amendment Act after the proviso of Section 11A of the Principal Act, a further proviso had been added which was as follows: -“Provided further that in respect of the acquisition of the land referred to in such Section (3A) and sub-section (3B) of Section 9 the award shall be made within a period of two year from the date of issue of public notice under Section 9.” The respondents, particularly the respondent no. 2 herein, never made any attempt to determine and/or to pay the compensation in question either during the pendency of the said Act II of 1948, since expired or under the said Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which stood repealed with effect from 1st January 2014 and in fact, till date no award had been declared in respect of the said land although the project for which the said land was taken over, was completed long back which was permanent in nature. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 stood repealed on and from 1st January, 2014 and in place and stead of the said Land Acquisition Act, 1894, a new Act namely The R
Where acquisition proceedings under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, and a subsequent notice under Section 9(3B) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, have lapsed, the petit....
Notices under Section 4(1a) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 issued prior to March 31, 1992, and for which no award was passed within 3 years, had already lapsed and co....
The delay in approaching the court did not debar the petitioner from seeking remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The demand for justice was compelling, and the court emphasized the....
Landowners whose land is acquired for public purposes are entitled to fair compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,....
Failure to issue an award within the stipulated period under Act II of 1948 causes acquisition proceedings to lapse, necessitating a new process under Act XXX of 2013 for compensation.
Failure to issue an award within the stipulated period under the Land Acquisition Act results in lapse of notice, affecting the validity of the acquisition process and requiring compensation under Ac....
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
