Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, challenged an order dated 1-11-1999 passed by the Commissioner and the consequent corrections made in the revenue record by order dated 13-12-1999. The respondents 3 and 4 were owners of certain pieces of land which were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation as determined by the award dated 2-8-1977 was paid and accepted by respondents 3 and 4, and possession was taken as reflected in revenue records. This fact was accepted by the respondents and nothing was done for several years. In 1996, respondents 3 and 4 filed an application before the Commissioner for correction of revenue records, claiming that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 48 of the Act. The Commissioner allowed the application and directed correction of records. The petitioner contended that the acquisition was complete and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to order correction. The court held that once compensation is accepted and possession is taken, the acquisition is complete and the title vests in the acquiring authority. The Commissioner's order was without jurisdiction and the corrections were illegal. The petition was allowed, quashing the order dated 1-11-1999 and the consequent corrections.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Completion of Acquisition - Sections 4, 6, 16, 17, 48 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Once compensation is accepted and possession is taken, the acquisition is complete and the title vests in the acquiring authority - Subsequent correction of revenue records does not divest the title already vested - Held that the petitioner's challenge to the correction of revenue records was without merit as the acquisition had already been completed (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the correction of revenue records after the completion of land acquisition proceedings can affect the title of the acquiring authority.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The order dated 1-11-1999 passed by the Commissioner and the consequent corrections made in the revenue record by order dated 13-12-1999 are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Sections 4
- 6
- 16
- 17
- 48
- Correction of revenue records
- Possession
- Compensation
- Title
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (01) 177
Writ Petition No. 166 of 2000
V.G. Palshikar, Smt. Nishita Mhatre
Shri C.J. Sawant with Shri Vijay Patil for petitioner, Mrs. J.S. Pawar AGP for State, Mrs. Archana B. Kololgi for Shri N.V. Veechalekar for respondent no.3, Dr. A.K. Barthakur with Shri Aditya Barthakur for respondent no.4
Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority
The State of Maharashtra, The Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, Bajirao Baburao Kalbhor, Dattatraya Baburao Kalbhor, The Principal Secretary, Revenue & Forest Dept., Mantralaya, Bombay
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of Commissioner directing correction of revenue records after land acquisition.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of order dated 1-11-1999 and consequent corrections in revenue records.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed that the acquisition was complete and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to order correction of revenue records.
Previous Decisions
Commissioner's order dated 1-11-1999 allowed application of respondents 3 and 4 for correction of revenue records.
Issues
Whether the correction of revenue records after completion of land acquisition proceedings can affect the title of the acquiring authority.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the acquisition was complete, compensation paid and accepted, possession taken, and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to order correction.
Respondents 3 and 4 argued that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 48 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
Once compensation is accepted and possession is taken under the Land Acquisition Act, the acquisition is complete and the title vests in the acquiring authority. Subsequent correction of revenue records cannot divest that title.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 1-11-1999 passed by the Commissioner and consequently corrections made in the revenue record by the order dated 13-12-1999.
That the respondents 3 and 4 were owners of certain pieces of land which came to be acquired by due process of law, taken under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894.
The compensation as determined by the award dated 2-8-1977 was paid and accepted by the respondents 3 and 4.
Possession was taken as will be reflected from the various revenue records.
It was only in the year 1996, to be precise, that the respondents 3 and 4 filed an application before the Commissioner for correction of revenue records.
Procedural History
The respondents 3 and 4 filed an application in 1996 before the Commissioner for correction of revenue records. The Commissioner passed an order on 1-11-1999 allowing the application and directed correction of records. The corrections were made on 13-12-1999. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging these orders.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Sections 4, 6, 16, 17, 48
