Compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act requires adherence to constitutional mandates, particularly for minority educational institutions, failing which such acquisitions are invalid.

JUDGMENT :

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

1. This is a peculiar case where the State has adopted an ingenious method to acquire the land owned by the appellants by invoking the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1894 Act”).

2. The State projected a need to widen the access to the bridge by acquiring the land belonging to a school claimed to be run by a linguistic minority. The institution in question is Sree Venkateswara English Medium School, Thripunithura, managed by Thulu Brahmana Yogam, a linguistic minority community in Kerala. The notification issued by the State, dated 09.06.2006, was challenged before this Court by the school authority in W.P.(C). No. 18503 of 2006. The challenge primarily centred on Article 30(1A) of the Constitution of India.

3. Clause 1(A) of Article 30 of the Constitution of India reads as follows:

“30(1A). In making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition of any property of an educational institution established and administered by a minority, referred to in clause (1), the State shall ensure that the amount fixed by or determined under such law for the acquisition of such property is such as would not restrict or abrogate the right guaranteed under that clause.”

This clause was inserted by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, with effect from 20.06.1979.

4. In Society of St. Joseph's College v. Union of India , (2002) 1 SCC 273 , the Hon’ble Apex Court held that Article 30(1A) of the Constitution of India mandates that a specific law is required to provide for the compulsory acquisition of property belonging to minority educational institutions, and without making a specific law, the State cannot acquire the property of such institutions.

5. Faced with such a situation, and in the absence of any specific law enabling the acquisition of property belonging to a minority educational institution, it would not have been possible for the State to acquire the land of Sree Venkateswara English Medium School, Thripunithura. Consequently, in the writ petition, a compromise was arrived at between the school authority and the State. Pursuant to an understanding, a statement was filed before this Court. As per the terms of the compromise, in lieu of land from the school authority, they will be compensated by handing over the land belonging to the adjacent owners through the acquisition. The adjacent owners are the appellants herein. Acting on the compromise, this Court disposed of the writ petition filed by the school authority, recording the terms of the compromise. It appears that the bridge was widened and constructed by using the land of the school, and in order to compensate for the land so acquired, a notification dated 19.05.2007 was issued to acquire the land belonging to the appellants herein, who are the writ petitioners in W.P.(C).No. 24031/2008.

6. In this writ petition, the very claim of minority status by the school authority was questioned, and the appellants contended that the acquisition was a colourable exercise of power. The learned Single Judge, who heard the matter, dismissed the challenge. On dismissal, an award bearing no. 1/10 was passed on 22.03.2010. In the reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, the appellants did not participate, and the Reference Court answered the reference, holding that the appellants were not entitled to enhanced compensation. This issue was separately raised in O.P.(C). No. 1802/2011 before this Court. Accordingly, both the appeal and the original petition challenging the award have been tagged together for hearing. We, therefore, deem it a