Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, challenging the award dated 02.12.2015 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jigaon Project under Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitioners were twenty-two agriculturists from Nimgaon and Nandura, Taluka Nandura, District Buldhana. The respondents included the State of Maharashtra through its Secretaries, Commissioner, Collector, Special Land Acquisition Officer, and Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation. Land admeasuring 30 hectares 91 ares was proposed for acquisition for resettlement of residents of village Yerli due to submergence under the Jigaon Project. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Tahsil Office, Nandura on 02.02.2013. Twenty-four land owners filed objections on 11.02.2013; an enquiry under Section 5-A was held on 05.03.2013, and objections were finally decided on 24.06.2013. A declaration under Section 6(1) was published in the official gazette and in newspapers on 25.07.2013 and 06.08.2013. According to the award, public notice of the declaration under Section 6(2) and notices under Section 9(1) and (2) were issued on 05.12.2013, and the award was passed on 02.12.2015. The writ petition was filed on 23.12.2013 challenging the Section 4 notification and subsequent notices; on 24.12.2013 the Court permitted acquisition proceedings to continue but directed that possession of the petitioners shall not be disturbed. After the award was passed, the petition was amended to challenge the award, and the Court admitted the petition on the question whether the final notification under Section 6 had been published after service of notices under Section 9(3) and (4). The Court directed production of inward and outward registers, but the respondents failed to produce them, citing an inadvertent clerical error. The petitioners contended that the award was not made within two years from the declaration under Section 6(2) in breach of Section 11-A, that there was no proof of the declaration dated 05.12.2013, and that mandatory steps under Sections 7 and 8 were not complied with because the Collector failed to take an order for acquisition and failed to mark and measure the land. The respondents argued that all mandatory provisions were followed, that prior joint measurement on 30.07.2010 made re-measurement under Section 8 unnecessary, that the award was within two years, that non-production of registers was due to clerical oversight, and that some land owners' affidavits showed the declaration was affixed in the Gram Panchayat and Talathi office. The Court perused the records and observed two principal contentions: first, that there was no final declaration under Section 6(2) on 05.12.2013; and second, that mandatory compliance under Sections 7 and 8 was missing. The Court noted that a communication dated 05.12.2013 lacked an outward number and that the Collector's affidavit admitted non-maintenance of registers due to clerical error. The Court emphasized the mandatory nature of Sections 7 and 8 and the burden on the State to produce records. The available excerpt ends without recording the final operative order, so the final decision is not contained in the provided text. This summary covers the background, material facts, legal issues, arguments, and the Court's analysis as reflected in the excerpt.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Declaration under Section 6(2) and Section 11-A Time Limit - Award must be made within two years from declaration under Section 6(2) - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 6(2), 11-A - Petitioners contended that final declaration was not made on 05.12.2013 and records were created to show award was within two years; respondents claimed award on 02.12.2015 was within time. Court directed production of inward and outward registers to verify, and documents lacked outward numbers and registers were not produced due to alleged clerical error. Held that compliance with Section 11-A hinges on proof of declaration under Section 6(2), which the State must establish from records (Paras 3,5,6). B) Land Acquisition - Mandatory Steps under Sections 7 and 8 - Collector's order for acquisition and marking/measurement cannot be dispensed with - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 7, 8 - Petitioners argued Collector failed to take order after declaration and failed to mark and measure land; respondents relied on prior joint measurement. Court observed these steps are mandatory and cannot be bypassed. Held that mandatory compliance with Sections 7 and 8 is essential before passing award (Paras 3,5). C) Land Acquisition - Public Notice and Notices under Section 9(3),(4) - Sequence of final declaration and notices affects validity - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 9 - Petitioners challenged that final declaration under Section 6(2) was shown to be made on same day as notices under Section 9(3),(4), suggesting procedural irregularity. Court noted final declaration dated 30.11.2013 and publication stated on 05.12.2013, same day as notices, raising concern about proper sequence. Held that proper sequence under Sections 6 and 9 must be maintained (Paras 2,5). D) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 - High Court can examine procedural compliance in land acquisition - Constitution of India, Article 226 - High Court scrutinized records maintained by Special Land Acquisition Officer and directed production of registers to verify compliance; interim protection granted to petitioners. Held that writ court has power to examine procedural irregularities and safeguard possession (Paras 1,2,5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the award dated 02.12.2015 passed under Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 complied with Sections 6 to 9 and Section 11-A of the said Act, particularly whether mandatory steps under Sections 7 and 8 were undertaken and whether the final declaration under Section 6(2) was validly made and published within two years before the award.
Law Points
- Mandatory compliance with Sections 7 and 8 of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 before passing award
- Declaration under Section 6(2) must be proved by records
- Award must be made within two years under Section 11A
- Public notice under Section 9 must follow proper sequence
- Burden lies on State to produce records of acquisition process
