Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, heirs of agricultural tenants of land bearing Survey Nos. 95/11, 95/3, and 95/4 in village Nuve, Goa, filed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the State of Goa and its officials to withdraw notifications dated 5.9.2007 and 5.2.2009 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, respectively. The notifications declared the intention to acquire 50675 square metres of land, including the petitioners' land, for development of a government village school playground at the instance of the Directorate of Sports and Youth Affairs, Panaji. The petitioners filed objections on 5.10.2007. The core legal issue was whether the acquisition proceedings were vitiated due to non-compliance with Section 5A of the Act, which mandates that the landowner be given an opportunity to be heard before the declaration under Section 6 is made. The petitioners argued that they were not afforded such an opportunity. The respondents contended that the objections were considered. The court, after hearing both sides, held that the opportunity of hearing under Section 5A is a mandatory requirement and its non-compliance vitiates the acquisition proceedings. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, quashed the notifications dated 5.9.2007 and 5.2.2009, and directed the respondents to provide a fresh opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with Section 5A.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Section 5A - Right to be heard - Mandatory requirement - The acquisition of land for development of a government village school playground was challenged on the ground that the petitioners were not given an opportunity to be heard under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court held that the opportunity of hearing under Section 5A is a mandatory requirement and its non-compliance vitiates the acquisition proceedings. The notifications under Sections 4 and 6 were quashed. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 are vitiated due to non-compliance with Section 5A, which mandates giving an opportunity to the landowner to be heard before the declaration under Section 6 is made.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The notifications dated 5.9.2007 and 5.2.2009 are quashed. The respondents are directed to provide a fresh opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 5A
- Right to be heard
- Opportunity of hearing
- Mandatory requirement
- Acquisition for public purpose
- Compliance with statutory provisions
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (05) 48
Writ Petition No. 385 of 2009
S. J. Vazifdar, U. D. Salvi
Mr. M. S. Sonak with Mr. J. Supekar for petitioners; Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kamat, Additional Government Advocate for respondents
Mr. Ibaldo Alvito Gomes, Mrs. Jacqueline M. A. Gomes, Mrs. Bernadita Gomes
The State of Goa through the Chief Secretary, The Under Secretary (Revenue), Revenue Department, Government of Goa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging land acquisition notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Remedy Sought
Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw the notifications dated 5.9.2007 and 5.2.2009 concerning acquisition of agricultural land.
Filing Reason
Non-compliance with Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which mandates an opportunity to be heard before the declaration under Section 6.
Issues
Whether the acquisition proceedings are vitiated due to non-compliance with Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they were not given an opportunity to be heard under Section 5A before the declaration under Section 6 was made.
Respondents contended that the objections were considered and the opportunity was provided.
Ratio Decidendi
The opportunity of hearing under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is a mandatory requirement. Non-compliance with this provision vitiates the acquisition proceedings, and the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 must be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners – heirs of the agricultural tenants in respect of agricultural land bearing Survey No.95/11, 95/3 and 95/4 of village Nuve are seeking writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents / the State and its officials to withdraw the notifications dated 5.9.2007 and 5.2.2009 concerning the acquisition of the said lands under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 respectively.
Notification dated 5.9.2007 under Section 4 of the said Act admittedly declared the intention of the respondent / State to acquire all those pieces and parcels of land totally admeasuring 50675 square metres including the aforesaid lands at village Nuve for development of government village school playground at Nuve and to take steps in that regard at the instance Directorate of Sports and Youth Affairs, Panaji.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay at Goa challenging the notifications dated 5.9.2007 (under Section 4) and 5.2.2009 (under Section 6) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petition was heard and judgment reserved on 29th March 2010, and pronounced on 3rd May 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, Section 5A, Section 6
