Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1583
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Pankaj Mithal, Saral Srivastava, JJ.
Ram Nivas - Appellant
Vs.
State Of U.P. Thru Secretary And Others - Respondent
Writ-C No. 68915 of 2014
Decided On : 27-09-2019
Rahul Agarwal, Adv., M.C. Chaturvedi, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a declaration made under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 must adhere to the statutory limitation period and objections filed under Section 5A must be decided by the competent authority to be valid.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Validity of Declaration - Land Acquisition Act,1894 - Section 6
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the validity of the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894, questioning its timing and the authority's competence to consider objections filed under Section 5A. The land was notified for acquisition in 2005, and the declaration was issued in 2012.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the declaration made under Section 6 was beyond the one-year limitation period prescribed by proviso (ii) to Section 6(1) of the Act. Additionally, the objections filed under Section 5A were not decided by the competent authority, rendering the rejection of objections and the subsequent report to the government invalid.
Issues: The primary issues were the timing of the declaration under Section 6 and the competence of the authority to consider objections under Section 5A.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the declaration made under Section 6 was beyond the statutory limitation period and was therefore a nullity. Additionally, the rejection of objections by an incompetent authority rendered the subsequent report and recommendation for the declaration invalid.
Final Decision: The court quashed the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act, ruling in favor of the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the validity of the declaration dated 11.5.2012 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in respect of the land of various villages in district Agra notified for acquisition under Section 4 of the Act on 3.10.2005 lastly published on 28.11.2005 for the benefit of the Agra Development Authority.
2. The petitioner apart from seeking quashing of the aforesaid declaration has also made a prayer for the quashing of the entire acquisition proceedings pursuant to the notifications dated 3.10.2005 and 11.05.2012 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act respectively.
3. The primary ground for attacking the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act is that it is beyond time of one year from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act as provided under proviso (ii) to Section 6(1) of the Act; and that the objections filed by the petitioner under Section 5-A of the Act were not decided by the Collector who is the competent authority but by the Special Land Acquisition Officer who was not notified for the purposes of dealing with the said objections and that no personal hearing was given to the petitioner while dealing with the said objections and thereafter making recommendation to the State Government.
4. First, the facts in brief for the better and complete appreciation of controversy vis-a-vis the legal position involved and the reasoning for its resolution.
5. On the proposal of the Collector, Agra dated 21.12.2004 proceedings were initiated for the acquisition of the land for the Taj Nagar Housing Scheme Phase-III promoted by the Agra Development Authority. A notification under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(4) of the Act was issued on 3.10.2005 dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. Apart from the Gazette and news-papers it was last published on 28.11.2005 in the locality.
6. The said notification was challenged by many tenure holders by filing separate writ petitions. The main one was by Kashma Sahkari Avas Samiti Ltd. i.e. Writ Petition No.72063 of 2005. The High Court vide interim order dated 23.11.2005 directed the authorities to maintain status quo till 28.11.2005. Thereafter on 12.12.2005 the parties were directed to maintain status quo until further orders and they were directed to exchange the pleadings. The said writ petition and several other writ petitions connected with the same were decided vide judgment and order dated 25.8.2006. The writ petitions were allowed and the application of the provision of Section 17(1) and (4) of the Act was held to be invalid and the liberty was given to the respondents to proceed with the acquisition afresh in accordance with law from the stage of issuance and publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act by affording opportunity to the petitioners or to the tenure holders to file objections under Section 5A of the Act and thereafter, if necessary, to issue a declaration under Section 6 of the Act.
7. The State of U.P. as well as the Agra Development Authority aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 25.8.2006 preferred three special leave petitions i.e. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.19602 of 2006 (State of U.P. Vs. Kshama Sahkari Avas Samiti Ltd. and others); Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20149 of 2006 (Agra Development Authority Vs. Kshama Sahkari Avas Samiti Ltd.) and Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20489 of 2006 (Agra Development Authority Vs. Sahab Singh). All the three special leave petitions were taken up together on 8.12.2006 and apart from issuing notice to the contesting parties, a direction was issued to maintain status quo. These special leave petitions were finally decided by the Supreme Court vide its judgmen
