Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, claiming to be shareholders of the Communidade of Betalbatim (respondent no. 3), filed a writ petition challenging the acquisition of a portion of property surveyed under no. 169/10 admeasuring 201 square metres at Betalbatim Village. The acquisition was initiated by the State of Goa under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, vide notification dated 16.03.2006, for the purpose of rehabilitating respondent no. 4, who was displaced due to acquisition of his property for road construction. The petitioners contended that the acquisition was malafide and not for a public purpose. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the acquisition for rehabilitation of a displaced person is clearly for a public purpose. The court noted that the petitioners, as shareholders of the Communidade, did not have locus standi to challenge the acquisition as the Communidade itself did not object. The court found no merit in the allegations of malafides and dismissed the petition, upholding the acquisition.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Public Purpose - Rehabilitation - Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Acquisition of land for rehabilitation of a person displaced due to road construction is for a public purpose - The court held that rehabilitation of displaced persons is a public purpose and the acquisition cannot be struck down on grounds of malafides or lack of public purpose (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquisition of land for rehabilitation of a displaced person is for a public purpose and whether the petitioners, as shareholders of the Communidade, have locus standi to challenge the acquisition.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is upheld.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 4
- Public Purpose
- Rehabilitation
- Communidade
- Shareholder
- Locus Standi
- Malafides
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (03) 99
WRIT PETITION NO. 233 OF 2007
Mr. J. Supekar, Mr. Vivek Rodrigues, Mr. S. D. Padiyar, Mr. K. Dessai, Mr. S. G. Desai, Mr. Pavithran AV, Mr. L. Raghunandan
Shri Gasper Fernandes, Shri Joaquim Silvestre Fernandes, Shri Anthony Fernandes
State of Goa, The Administrator of Communidades, The Communidade of Betalbatim, Shri Joao Fernandes alias John Fernandes, Betalbatim Sports Club, Village Panchayat of Betalbatim, The Under Secretary (Revenue), The Collector of South Goa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging land acquisition for rehabilitation of a displaced person.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the acquisition notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Filing Reason
Petitioners claimed the acquisition was malafide and not for a public purpose.
Issues
Whether the acquisition of land for rehabilitation of a displaced person is for a public purpose?
Whether the petitioners, as shareholders of the Communidade, have locus standi to challenge the acquisition?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the acquisition was malafide and not for a public purpose.
Respondents contended that the acquisition was for rehabilitation of a displaced person, which is a public purpose.
Ratio Decidendi
Rehabilitation of a person displaced due to acquisition for road construction is a public purpose. Shareholders of a Communidade do not have locus standi to challenge acquisition when the Communidade itself does not object.
Judgment Excerpts
The above Petition takes exception to the acquisition initiated by the Respondent-Government to acquire a portion of the property surveyed under no. 169/10 admeasuring 201 square metres situated at Betalbatim Village, to rehabilitate the Respondent no. 4 in view of his displacement of a portion of a property acquired for the construction of a road by a Notification dated 16.03.2006 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the acquisition notification dated 16.03.2006 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court heard the parties and dismissed the petition on 05.03.2014.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4
