Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, fifteen individuals who were owners of various agricultural lands in Loni, Taluka Warud, District Amaravati, filed a writ petition challenging the acquisition of their lands by the State of Maharashtra for a public purpose. The lands in question included Survey No. 28/1 (2.58 hectares) owned by petitioner nos. 1, 2, and 3; Survey No. 28/2 (3.26 hectares) owned by petitioner nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7; Survey No. 28/3 (2.58 hectares) owned by petitioner no. 8; Survey No. 28/4 (2.58 hectares) owned by petitioner nos. 9, 10, 11, and 12; and Survey No. 28/5 (2.58 hectares) owned by petitioner nos. 13, 14, and 15. The acquisition was initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a notification under Section 4(1) published. The petitioners filed objections under Section 5A of the Act, but they were not given a personal hearing by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The officer merely considered the written objections and submitted a report to the government, which then issued a declaration under Section 6. The petitioners contended that the denial of a personal hearing violated the principles of natural justice and the mandatory requirements of Section 5A. The respondents, represented by the State of Maharashtra, argued that the procedure was followed. The court, after hearing both sides, examined the provisions of Section 5A, which requires that the Collector give the objector an opportunity of being heard in person or by pleader. The court noted that the record did not show that any personal hearing was granted. The court held that the right to be heard under Section 5A is a substantive right and its denial vitiates the acquisition proceedings. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, quashed the acquisition proceedings, and set aside the declaration under Section 6. The respondents were directed to return the possession of the land to the petitioners if taken, and to pay costs of Rs. 10,000 to the petitioners.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Section 5A Hearing - Right to be Heard - Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The petitioners, owners of agricultural land, challenged the acquisition on the ground that they were not given a personal hearing after filing objections under Section 5A. The court held that the right to be heard under Section 5A is a substantive right and denial of personal hearing vitiates the acquisition proceedings. The court found that the Special Land Acquisition Officer did not afford the petitioners an opportunity of being heard in person, and the declaration under Section 6 was made without proper compliance. Held that the acquisition is quashed and set aside (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquisition of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is vitiated due to denial of opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners under Section 5A of the Act?
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the acquisition proceedings, and set aside the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents were directed to return possession of the land to the petitioners if taken, and to pay costs of Rs. 10,000 to the petitioners.
Law Points
- Right to be heard under Section 5A of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 is a substantive right
- Denial of personal hearing vitiates acquisition proceedings
- Section 5A inquiry must be conducted in a quasi-judicial manner
