Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vishnudev Coop. Hsg. Society, a registered cooperative society, was the owner of land admeasuring 10H 33R forming part of Survey No.210/1 at Mauje Wakad, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune. This land was acquired for the Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority under an award dated 23 September 1986 made under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitioner subsequently applied under Section 48(1) of the 1894 Act seeking withdrawal of the land from acquisition. The Minister (Revenue) allowed this application by an order dated 10 June 2004, whereby the land was deleted from acquisition, and further directions were given to the Revenue and Forest Department to issue appropriate notification to give effect to the deletion. However, despite the order, the respondents (Revenue and Forest Department and the State Government) failed to take steps to issue the notification. The petitioner therefore filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to comply with the order and issue the notification. The Court, after hearing the parties, held that the State is bound to implement the order passed under Section 48(1) and issue the necessary notification. The Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to comply with the order dated 10 June 2004 and issue the appropriate notification within a reasonable time.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Withdrawal from Acquisition - Section 48(1) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Implementation of Minister's Order - The petitioner's land was acquired under an award dated 23 September 1986. The Minister (Revenue) allowed the petitioner's application under Section 48(1) and ordered deletion of the land from acquisition on 10 June 2004, directing the Revenue and Forest Department to issue appropriate notification. Despite the order, the State failed to issue the notification. The Court held that the State is bound to implement the order and issue the necessary notification to give effect to the withdrawal. A writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondents to comply with the order dated 10 June 2004 and issue the notification within a reasonable time. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government is obligated to issue a notification under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to give effect to an order passed by the Minister (Revenue) withdrawing land from acquisition, and whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the State to perform this duty.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to comply with the order dated 10 June 2004 passed by the Minister (Revenue) and issue appropriate notification in pursuance of the said order within a reasonable time.
Law Points
- Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- once an order is passed by the competent authority withdrawing land from acquisition
- the State is bound to issue a notification to give effect to such order
- mandamus can be issued to compel performance of statutory duty
Case Details
Writ Petition No. 5783 of 2006
Dr. Manjula Chellur, C.J., G.S. Kulkarni, J.
Mr. S.L. Suryawanshi for Petitioner, Mr. P.P. Kakade AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Vijay Patil for Respondent No.3
Vishnudev Coop. Hsg. Society
Revenue And Forest Dept., State of Maharashtra, Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking mandamus to compel the State to issue notification giving effect to withdrawal of land from acquisition under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents to comply with the order dated 10 June 2004 passed by the Minister (Revenue) and issue appropriate notification in pursuance of the said order.
Filing Reason
Despite the Minister's order dated 10 June 2004 deleting the land from acquisition, the respondents failed to issue the necessary notification to give effect to the order.
Previous Decisions
The Minister (Revenue) passed an order on 10 June 2004 under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, allowing the petitioner's application and directing deletion of the land from acquisition and issuance of notification.
Issues
Whether the State Government is obligated to issue a notification under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to give effect to an order passed by the Minister (Revenue) withdrawing land from acquisition?
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the State to perform this duty?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that despite the Minister's order dated 10 June 2004, the respondents have not taken steps to issue the notification, and thus a mandamus should be issued.
Respondents did not contest the petition; they appeared but no specific arguments are recorded in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
Once an order is passed under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, by the competent authority withdrawing land from acquisition, the State is bound to issue a notification to give effect to such order. Failure to do so is a dereliction of statutory duty, and a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel compliance.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioner a registered Cooperative society, was the owner of land admeasuring 10H 33R forming part of land bearing Survey No.210/1 situated at Mauje Wakad, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune (for short 'the said land').
The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the orders dated 10 June 2004 passed by the statutory authority the Minister (Revenue) deleting the land from acquisition, further steps to issue appropriate notifications, to give effect to the order passed under Section 48(1) of the 1894 Act, are not being taken by Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Procedural History
The petitioner's land was acquired under an award dated 23 September 1986. The petitioner applied under Section 48(1) for withdrawal, which was allowed by the Minister on 10 June 2004. Despite the order, the State did not issue the notification. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 5783 of 2006 before the Bombay High Court seeking mandamus. The Court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 28 February 2017, allowing the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 11, Section 48(1)
