Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dealt with an appeal by special leave filed by the State of Karnataka against a judgment of the High Court which had quashed a land acquisition notification and declaration. The dispute arose from acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State of Karnataka published a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on August 26, 1982. An enquiry under Section 5-A was conducted thereafter, but before the receipt of the report from the Land Acquisition Officer, a declaration under Section 6 was published on June 24, 1985, which was within three years from the date of the Section 4(1) notification. Two writ petitions were filed on December 10, 1985 challenging the Section 4(1) notification and the Section 6 declaration. The High Court allowed the writ petitions on February 26, 1991, and quashed both the notification and the declaration. The High Court held that the enquiry under Section 5-A was not properly conducted and that the declaration could not be published within three years even after excluding the period of pendency of the writ petitions under the proviso to Section 6. The State of Karnataka appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court observed that the declaration under Section 6 was published within three years, as held by the High Court, but the enquiry under Section 5-A was found defective and required to be quashed. The Court held that if the declaration is quashed, a fresh enquiry under Section 5-A has to be conducted, and the limitation for conducting such enquiry and publishing the declaration would run from the date of receipt of the High Court's order, not from the date of the original Section 4(1) notification. The Court relied on its earlier decision in N. Narasimhaiah v. State of Karnataka, (1996) 3 SCC 88. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, quashed the declaration under Section 6, and permitted the appellant to conduct an enquiry within four months from the date of receipt of the order and publish the declaration within one month thereafter. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Limitation - Fresh Enquiry after Quashing of Declaration - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 4(1), 5-A, 6 - The High Court had quashed a notification under Section 4(1) and declaration under Section 6 on the ground that the enquiry under Section 5-A was not properly conducted and that the declaration could not be published within three years after excluding the period of pendency of writ petitions. The Supreme Court held that when a declaration under Section 6 is quashed due to defective enquiry under Section 5-A, the limitation for conducting a fresh enquiry and publishing a fresh declaration commences from the date of receipt of the court's order, not from the date of the original Section 4(1) notification. The Court relied on N. Narasimhaiah v. State of Karnataka and allowed the appeals, quashing the declaration but permitting the appellant to conduct an enquiry within four months from the date of receipt of the order and publish the declaration within one month thereafter. Held that the High Court erred in quashing the Section 4(1) notification and computing limitation from the original notification. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether limitation for conducting enquiry and publishing declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 should be computed from the date of original Section 4(1) notification or from the date of the High Court's order quashing the declaration.
Final Decision
Appeals allowed. Declaration under Section 6 quashed. Appellant permitted to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A within four months from date of receipt of this order and publish declaration within one month thereafter. No costs.
Law Points
- Limitation for fresh enquiry under Section 5-A after quashing of Section 6 declaration starts from date of receipt of court order
- not original Section 4(1) notification
- High Court erred in quashing Section 4(1) notification
