Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered appeals by U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad against a High Court order that set aside a notification cancelling the release of land from acquisition. The land, measuring 1.85 acres in Village Mirzapur, Gorakhpur, was originally acquired in 1964 under the United Provinces Town Improvement Act, 1919 for a housing scheme. Possession was taken in 1970 and an award passed in 1971. In 1983, the land owners applied for release, claiming the land contained cemeteries of their forefathers and was their only source of livelihood. After several representations and writ petitions, the government issued a notification on 7 April 2003 under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 releasing the land. However, in 2005, the government cancelled this release by another notification, citing that the land owners had made false representations and were selling the land for commercial purposes, as revealed by an inquiry. The High Court set aside the cancellation, holding that once land is released, it can only be re-acquired through fresh proceedings. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, applying Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which provides that the power to issue a notification includes the power to rescind it. The Court noted that the release was obtained by fraud, as the land owners falsely claimed the existence of cemeteries and their intention to use the land for livelihood, but instead sold it in plots. The Court held that fraud vitiates everything, and the government was justified in cancelling the release without initiating fresh acquisition. The appeals were allowed, and the High Court's order was set aside.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Withdrawal from Acquisition - Section 48(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Power to Cancel - Section 21 of General Clauses Act, 1897 - The power to issue a notification includes the power to rescind it, and a notification under Section 48(1) can be cancelled if the release was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, without requiring fresh acquisition proceedings (Paras 10-11). B) Land Acquisition - Fraud - Misrepresentation - Cancellation of Release - The land owners obtained release of land by falsely claiming existence of cemeteries and that they would use the land for livelihood, but subsequently sold the land for commercial purposes; such fraud vitiates the release notification and justifies its cancellation (Paras 8, 12). C) Land Acquisition - Vesting - Effect of Release - Upon release under Section 48(1), the land does not vest back in the original owner automatically; the government retains the power to cancel the release if it was obtained by fraud, and the land remains subject to acquisition (Para 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a notification issued under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 releasing land from acquisition can be cancelled by a subsequent notification without initiating fresh acquisition proceedings, especially when the release was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's order, and upheld the cancellation notification dated 15.09.2005. The Court held that the power to issue a notification under Section 48(1) includes the power to rescind it under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and that the release was obtained by fraud, justifying cancellation without fresh acquisition.
Law Points
- Power to rescind notification under Section 48(1) of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 includes power to cancel under Section 21 of General Clauses Act
- 1897
- Fraud vitiates everything
- Land released on false representation can be cancelled without fresh acquisition
