IMPORTANT POINT
Violation of section 5, L.A. Act vitiates the proceedings and the acquisition.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India - Article 239 - Notifications dated 8.10.1968, 1.1.1970 and 14.8.1989 - Administrator conferred powers to exercise powers and functions vested in appropriate government - Acquisition of land for and on behalf of Union Territories must be sanctioned by the Administrator only - No other authority competent. (Para 41)
        (b) Chandigarh (Delegation of Powers) Act, 1987 - Section 3(1) - Administrator cannot delegate powers exercisable by appropriate government - Contention that such power was delegated to Advisor rejected. (Para 42)
        (c) Chandigarh (Delegation of Powers) Act, 1987 - Section 3(1) r/w Article 239, Constitution of India - Administrator delegating powers to Advisor on 25.2.1988 - President conferring powers exercisable by appropriate government on 14.8.1989 - Earlier delegation could not cover such powers. (Para 43)
        (d) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 5A(1) r/w section 6(1) - Objections not attended to - LAO making misleading and false statement consistent with letter of Administrator to appellant - So was the case of Special Secretary, Finance and the Adviser to the Administrator - Section 5A(1) violated. (Paras 45 to 48)
        (e) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 5A(2) - Right to file objections - It is a substantial right - Depriving a person whose land is being acquired of this right vitiates the proceedings. (Para 58)
        (1964) 3 SCR 425; (1973) 2 SCC 337; (1980) 2 SCC 471; (2005) 7 SCC 627 - Relied upon
        (f) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 5A(2) - Public purpose - Recommendation for acquisition on ground of public purpose without hearing u/s 5A(2) - Recommendations vitiated - Notification u/s 6(1) based on such recommendation also vitiated. (Para 58)
        (g) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 6(1) - Declaration - Judicial Review - Courts can interfere if mandate of sections 5A(2) and 6(1) are violated. (Para 61)
        AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1968 SC 615 - Distinguished
        (1975) 4 SCC 285; (1993) 2 SCC 662; (1996) 1 SCC 250; (1996) 10 SCC 721; (2008) 9 SCC 552 - Distinguished impliedly
        (h) Constitution of India - Article 26 - High Court not examining substantive grounds of challenge - Not proper. (Para 63)
       Facts of the case:
        These appeals challenge acquisition of land in the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
       Finding of the Court:
        Adviser to the Administrator was not competent to accord approval to the initiation of the acquisition proceedings or take decision on the reports submitted by the LAO under Section 5-A (2) of the Act and record his satisfaction that the land was needed for the specified public purpose.
       Result : Appeals allowed.

Judgment :-

G.S. Singhvi, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Chandigarh, which is known all over the world as ‘the City Beautiful’, was planned by French Architect Monsieur Le Corbusier. The plan prepared by Le Corbusier in collaboration with two other architects, namely, Maxwell Fry and Jane Drew envisaged division of the city of Chandigarh into residential sectors with provision for markets, educational institutions, hospitals and other facilities.

3. After finalisation of the plan, the Government of Punjab acquired land of various villages for establishing Chandigarh as the new capital of the State and also constituted various committees including Land Scape Committee for implementing the plan. In the meeting of the Land Scape Committee held on 3.9.1954, the Divisional Forest Officer, Rupar (now Ropar) suggested that the land lying along the right bank of Sukhna Choe and the left bank of Patiala Ki Rao where plantation had been started by the Forest Department should be declared as reserved forest under Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900. This was approved by the Land Scape Committee, and Chief Engineer, P.W.D. was asked to furnish the details of the area. On receipt of necessary details of khasra numbers together with the plan of the area, which included residential and commercial plots, preliminary notification under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 was issued by the State Government on 28.2.1956 and final notification under Section 20 of that Act was issued on 3.2.1961 declaring 6724.19 acres land including about 6000 acres land which had already been utilised for construction of the first phase of Chandigarh, and about 280 acres land falling in the revenue estates of village Hallo Majra and village Dalheri Rajputan as reserved forest. The State Government also acquired hilly area measuring 6172.09 acres of Sukhna lake catchment during 1961-62, 1962-63 and 1963-64 for carrying out soil conservation works to reduce the silt in-flow into the lake. The Forest Department acquired 536.64 acres of land of various villages along Sukhna Choe during 1963-64 to carry out soil conservation and other improvemental works.

4. In 1966, the State of Punjab was reorganised under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 (for short, ‘the 1966 Act’) leading to the creation of the new State of Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh and transfer of some territories to State of Himachal Pradesh. With this, 6706 acres land out of 6724.19 acres land declared as reserved forest vide notification dated 3.2.1961 was transferred to the Union Territory of Chandigarh and 6127.09 acres of land constituting hilly catchment came to vest in the Central Government by virtue of Section 48(5) of the 1966 Act.

5. With the passage of time, Chandigarh became an important destination for education and attracted students from all over the country. However, the employment opportunities available in the city did not match the educational facilities and this resulted in exodus of talent from Chandigarh to other cities. In the beginning of 21st Century the Chandigarh Administration took steps to provide various incentives including allotment of land to the entrepreneurs desirous of setting up industries in the field of information technology because that was expected to generate huge employment. In the first instance, the Administration decided that 111 acres land, which had been acquired between 1950 and 1977 and was lying vacant, may be utilised for establishing a world class Information Technology Park in the name of Late Prime Minister Shri Rajiv Gandhi (for short, ‘the IT Park’). This area was designated as Phase-I of the IT Park and the plots were allotted to the following:

Table.....

6. Between 2000-2004 over 267 acres land was acquired for Phase-II of the IT Park and the plots were allotted to nine industries, the details of which are given below:

7. The land allotted to Wipro Technologies Ltd. (30 acres), Rolta India Ltd. (2.98 acres) and e-Sys Techno

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2012 Supreme(SC) 722

IMPORTANT POINT Violation of section 5, L.A. Act vitiates the proceedings and the acquisition.

Cases Referred (11)

IMPORTANT POINT
Violation of section 5, L.A. Act vitiates the proceedings and the acquisition.