Page 1

REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5478-5483 OF 2014
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos. 24297-24302 of 2007)
Union of India & Ors. ` . Appellants
Versus
Shiv Raj & Ors. . Respondents
JUDGMENT
DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.
1. These appeals have arisen from the impugned judgment and
order dated 11.5.2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ
Petition (Civil) Nos. 2529 of 1985; 889 of 1986; 988 of 1986; 2155
of 1987; 2645 of 1987; and 2747 of 1987, by which and whereunder,
the High Court has quashed the land acquisition proceedings in view
of the fact that the objections filed by the respondents-tenure holders
under Section 5A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred
to as `the Act 1894), had not been considered by the statutory
authorities in strict compliance of principles of natural justice and
thus, the subsequent proceedings stood vitiated, relying on the main
judgment and order of the same date passed in Writ Petition (Civil)
No.424 of 1987 titled Chatro Devi v. Union of India.
Page 2
2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are that:
A. The land of the respondents-tenure holders being survey no.
619/70, etc. admeasuring 50,000 bighas situated in revenue village
Chhatarpur, stood notified under Section 4 of the Act 1894 on
25.11.1980 for public purposes, namely, the planned development of
Delhi and objections under Section 5A were invited from the persons
interested within 30 days of the said Notification.
B. Respondents - persons interested, filed their objections under
Section 5A of the Act 1894. However, without considering and
disposing of the same, declaration under Section 6 of the Act 1894
was made on 7.6.1985. Notices under Sections 9 of the Act 1894 were
also issued on 30.12.1986 to the persons interested. It was at this stage
that the tenure holders filed writ petitions before the High Court
challenging the acquisition proceedings contending that proceedings
could not be continued without disposing of the objections filed by
them under Section 5A of the Act 1894. Admittedly, the Award No.
15/1987-88 was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on 5.6.1987.
2
Page 3
C. In respect of the land covered by the same notification under
Section 4 of the Act 1894, a very large number of writ petitions had
been filed. The said writ petitions filed on different grounds were
decided by different Benches at different points of time. So far as the
present group of cases is concerned, the matter was heard at length
and a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court examined the
contentions raised on behalf of the tenure holders/persons interested
which vide judgment and order dated 3.3.2005 held that the
notification under Section 6 of the Act 1894 was within the period
stipulated for the purpose after excluding the period during which the
interim stay order passed by the High Court remained into operation
and where the objections have not been filed, the impugned
declaration under Section 6 of the Act 1894 could not be assailed on
the ground of invalidity of inquiry under Section 5A of the Act 1894.
However, on the said issue in the cases where the objections had been
filed by the tenure holders and they had been given personal hearing
by one Collector but the report was submitted by his successor i.e.
another Collector, the Division Bench differed in opinion whether the
report could be held to be legal or not, mainly relying upon the
3
Page 4
Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Gullapalli Nageswara
Rao & Ors. v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport
Corporation & Anr., AIR 1959 SC 308 wherein it has categorically
been held that the Authority which hears the objectors must pass the
order. In case an Authority hears the objectors and demits the office
or stands transferred, his successor should hear the parties afresh and
not giving the opportunity of fresh hearing by the successor officer
would amount to failure of principles of natural justice and his order
would stand vitiated.
D. In view thereof, the matter was referred to the third Judge vide
order dated 3.3.2005 and vide judgment and order dated 20.12.2006,
the Honble third Judge held that in such a situation where objections
had been filed and had been heard by one Collector and the report had
been submitted by another Collector, the proceedings stood vitiated
being in violation of principles of natural justice.
E. In view of the majority opinion, as is evident from the order
dated 11.5.2007, the proceedings in such an eventuality stood quashed
by the impugned judgment and order.
4
Page 5
Hence, these appeals.
3. Shri P.P. Malhotra, learned Additional Solicitor General, Ms.
Geeta Luthra and Shri Sanjay Poddar, learned Senior Counsel, have
addressed a large number of legal and factual issues and also
submitted that the judgment and order of the High Court are not
sustainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, the question quashing the
land acquisition proceedings in such circumstances did not arise.
More so, the commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 2013) would not take
away the proceedings initiated under the Act 1894 by operation of law
as provided under Section 24 of the Act 2013. In the instant case, in
case, the appeals succeed on the main ground as to whether the
successor officer could submit the report on 5A objections there could
be no prohibition for the appellants to proceed with the land
acquisition proceedings initiated in 1980. The objections raised were
vague and had been in respect of limitation and were not specific in
nature. None of the writ petitioners had raised the issue about
violation of principles of natural justice in the writ petitions, though
5
Page 6
some of them amended their writ petitions but at a subsequent stage.
Some of the writ petitions had been filed by persons who came into
possession of the land subsequent to Section 4 notification.
4. On the contrary, Shri Mukul Rohatgi, Shri Shyam Diwan and
Shri Vinay Bhasin, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents, have vehemently opposed the appeals contending that in
view of the fact that the acquisition proceedings stood quashed finally
by the impugned judgment dated 11.5.2007 and a period of 7 years
has lapsed and the possession is still with the tenure holders. In view
of the Act 2013 coming into force, the proceedings have lapsed by
virtue of the provisions contained in Section 24 of the said Act. The
issues raised herein on behalf of the Union of India had not been
raised before the High Court. Amendments were allowed by the High
Court in a very large number of writ petitions about violation of
principles of natural justice i.e. the objections under Section 5-A were
not disposed of in accordance with law.
5. We have considered the rival submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6
Page 7
6. Section 5-A of the Act 1894 was not there in the original
statute.
In J.E.D. Ez! ". S#$%. &' S(!(# '& I)*+! (1902-1903 ! "#$
249% the "alcutta &igh "ourt e'(resse) its ina*ilit+ to grant relief to
the owner of the (ro(ert+ whose lan) was sought to *e ac,uire)
without gi-ing an+ o((ortunit+ of hearing o*ser-ing that there was no
(ro-ision in the Act re,uiring o*ser-ance of the (rinci(les of natural
.ustice. It was su*se,uent to the sai) .u)g/ent that the Act was
a/en)e) incor(orating Section 5-A w.e.f. 1.1.1924. 0he State/ent of
1*.ects an) 2easons for the sai) a/en)/ent (ro-i)e) that the
original Act )i) not o*lige the 3o-ern/ent to en,uire into an)
consi)er an+ o*.ection of the (ersons intereste) nor the Act (ro-i)e)
for right of hearing to the (erson whose interest stan)s a)-ersel+
affecte).
!. In N!)*#,-.! P!,!* ". U.P. /&"#)0#)(% AI2 1964 S"
121!% this "ourt )ealt with the nature of o*.ections un)er Section 5-A
of the Act 1894 o*ser-ing as un)er4
13. The right to file objections under Section 5-
A is a substantial right when a persons property is being
7
Page 8
threatened with acuisition and we cannot accept that
that right can be ta!en away as if by a side wind"#
8. 0he rules of natural .ustice ha-e *een ingraine) in the sche/e
of Section 5-A of the Act 1894 with a -iew to ensure that *efore an+
(erson is )e(ri-e) of his lan) *+ wa+ of co/(ulsor+ ac,uisition% he
/ust get an o((ortunit+ to o((ose the )ecision of the State
3o-ern/ent an)5or its agencies5instru/entalities to ac,uire the
(articular (arcel of lan).
Section 5-A(2 of the Act 1894% which re(resents statutor+
e/*o)i/ent of the rule of audi altera$ parte$% gi-es an o((ortunit+
to the o*.ector to /a6e an en)ea-our to con-ince the "ollector that
his lan) is not re,uire) for the (u*lic (ur(ose s(ecifie) in the
notification issue) un)er Section 4(1 of the Act 1894 or that there are
other -ali) reasons for not ac,uiring the sa/e. 0hus% section 5-A of
the Act 1894 e/*o)ies a -er+ .ust an) wholeso/e (rinci(le that a
(erson whose (ro(ert+ is *eing or is inten)e) to *e ac,uire) shoul)
ha-e a (ro(er an) reasona*le o((ortunit+ of (ersua)ing the authorities
concerne) that ac,uisition of the (ro(ert+ *elonging to that (erson
shoul) not *e /a)e.
8
Page 9
1n the consi)eration of the sai) o*.ection% the "ollector is
re,uire) to /a6e a re(ort. 0he State 3o-ern/ent is then re,uire) to
a((l+ /in) to the re(ort of the "ollector an) ta6e final )ecision on the
o*.ections file) *+ the lan)owners an) other intereste) (ersons. 0hen
an) then onl+% a )eclaration can *e /a)e un)er Section 6(1 of the Act
1894.
9. 0herefore% Section 5-A of the Act 1894 confers a -alua*le right
in fa-our of a (erson whose lan)s are sought to *e ac,uire). It is trite
that hearing gi-en to a (erson /ust *e an effecti-e one an) not a /ere
for/alit+. 7or/ation of o(inion as regar) the (u*lic (ur(ose as also
suita*ilit+ thereof /ust *e (rece)e) *+ a((lication of /in) ha-ing
)ue regar) to the rele-ant factors an) re.ection of irrele-ant ones. 0he
State in its )ecision /a6ing (rocess /ust not co//it an+ /is)irection
in law. It is also not in )is(ute that Section 5-A of the Act% 1894
confers a -alua*le i/(ortant right an) ha-ing regar) to the (ro-isions%
containe) in Article 300A of the "onstitution of In)ia has *een hel) to
*e a6in to a fun)a/ental right.
10. 0hus% the li/ite) right gi-en to an owner5(erson intereste)
un)er Section 5-A of the Act% 1894 to o*.ect to the ac,uisition
9
Page 10
(rocee)ings is not an e/(t+ for/alit+ an) is a su*stanti-e right%
which can *e ta6en awa+ onl+ for goo) an) -ali) reason an) within
the li/itations (rescri*e) un)er Section 1!(4 of the Act% 1894.
11. 0he 8an) Ac,uisition "ollector is )ut+-*oun) to o*.ecti-el+
consi)er the argu/ents a)-ance) *+ the o*.ector an) /a6e
reco//en)ations% )ul+ su((orte) *+ *rief reasons% as to wh+ the
(articular (iece of lan) shoul) or shoul) not *e ac,uire) an) whether
the (lea (ut forwar) *+ the o*.ector /erits acce(tance. In other
wor)s% the reco//en)ations /a)e *+ the 8an) Ac,uisition "ollector
shoul) reflect o*.ecti-e a((lication of /in) to the entire recor)
inclu)ing the o*.ections file) *+ the intereste) (ersons.
(See 4 M1),-+ S+)2- 3 O,. ". U)+&) &' I)*+!4 AI2 19!3 S" 11509
U)+&) &' I)*+! 3 O,. ". M15#,- H!),4 AI2 2004 S" 430!9
H+)*1,(!) P#(&6#10 C&7&!(+&) L(* ". D!+1, S-!-71 C-#)!+
!)* O,.4 AI2 2005 S" 35209 A)!)* S+)2- 3 A) ". S(!(# &' U.P.
3 O,.4 (2010 11 S"" 2429 D#" S-!!) ". S(!(# &' U.P.% (2011 4
S"" !699 R!2-8+ S+)2- S#-!.!( ". S(!(# &' H!%!)!4 (2012 1
S"" !929 U,-! S(1* !)* A2+$16(1!6 F!0, 9P: L(*. ". S(!(# &'
H!%!)!4 (2013 4 S"" 2109 an) ;&0#)<, E*1$!(+&) T1,( ".
S(!(# &' H!%!)!4 (2013 8 S"" 99.
12. 0his "ourt in /166!7!66+ N!2#,.!! R!& (su(ra% hel)4
10
Page 11
%ersonal hearing enables the authority concerned to
watch the de$eanour of the witnesses and clear up his
doubts during the course of the argu$ents& and the party
appearing to persuade the authority by reasoned
argu$ent to accept his point of 'iew. (f one person hears
and another decides& then personal hearing beco$es an
e$pty for$ality. )e therefore hold that the said
procedure followed in this case also offends another
basic principle of judicial procedure.#
(:/(hasis a))e)
13. 0his "ourt in R!,+* J!"#* 3 O,. ". S(!(# &' U.P. 3 A).%
AI2 2010 S" 22!5 following the .u)g/ent in /166!7!66+ (su(ra%
su(ra hel) that a (erson who hears /ust )eci)e an) that )i-i)e)
res(onsi*ilit+ is )estructi-e of the conce(t of hearing is too
fun)a/ental a (ro(osition to *e )ou*te).
14. A si/ilar -iew has *een re-iterate) *+ this "ourt in
A1(&0&(+"# T%# M!)1'!$(1#, A,,&$+!(+&) ". D#,+2)!(#*
A1(-&+(% 3 O,.% (2011 2 S"" 258% wherein this "ourt )ealt with a
case wherein the ;esignate) Authorit+ (;A un)er the rele-ant
Statute (asse) the final or)er on the /aterial collecte) *+ his
(re)ecessor in office who ha) also accor)e) the hearing to the (arties
concerne). 0his court hel) that the or)er stoo) -itiate) as it offen)e)
the *asic (rinci(les of natural .ustice.
11
Page 12
15. In view of the above, the law on the issue can be summarised to
the effect that the very person/officer, who accords the hearing to the
objector must also submit the report/ take decision on the objection
and in case his successor decides the case without giving a fresh
hearing, the order would stand vitiated having been passed in
violation of the principles of natural justice.
16. Before proceeding further, it is desirable to refer to the relevant
statutory provisions of the Act 2013 which reads as :
24. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,
in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated
under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 -
(a) Where no award under Section 11 of the said Land
Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of
this Act relating to the determination of compensation
shall apply or
(b) Where an award under said Section 11 has been
made, then such proceedings shall continue under the
provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said
Act has not been repealed.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section
(1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated
under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where an award
under the said section 11 has been made five years or
more prior to the commencement of this Act but the
physical possession of the land has not been taken or the
compensation has not been paid the said proceedings
shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate
12
Page 13
Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the
proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance
with the provisions of this Act.
Provided that where an award has been made and
compensation in respect of a majority of land holding has
not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries,
then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for
acquisition under Section 4 of the said Land Acquisition
Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with
the provisions of this Act"
1!. 0he (ro-isions of the Act 2013 referre) to hereina*o-e ha-e
*een consi)ere) *+ a three .u)ge *ench of this court in
P1)# M1)+$+7!6 C&7&!(+&) !)* A). ". H!!5$-!)* M+,++0!6
S&6!)5+ !)* O,.4 (2014 3 S"" 183. In the sai) case% the tenure-
hol)ers ha) challenge) the ac,uisition (rocee)ings *efore the
<o/*a+ &igh "ourt *+ filing nine writ (etitions% although two of
such writ (etitions ha) *een file) *efore /a6ing the awar) an) se-en
ha) *een file) after the awar). 0he lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings ha)
*een challenge) on -arious groun)s. 0he &igh "ourt allowe) the writ
(etitions an) ,uashe) the lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings an) issue)
certain )irections inclu)ing restoration of (ossession as in the sai)
case the (ossession ha) *een ta6en fro/ the tenure-hol)ers. 0his
"ourt in the a((eal file) *+ the authorit+ for whose *enefit the lan)
13
Page 14
ha) *een sought to *e ac,uire)% an) who ha) *een han)e) o-er the
(ossession as the lan) -este) in the State% a((roache) this "ourt *ut
the "ourt )i) not enter into the /erit regar)ing the correctness of the
.u)g/ent i/(ugne) therein rather hel) that it was not so necessar+ to
)eal with the correctness of the .u)g/ent in -iew of the (ro-isions of
the Act 2013 which (ro-i)e for re-co/(ulsor+ ac,uisition of lan)
fro/ the -er+ *eginning. 0he "ourt hel) as un)er4
11. Section *+,*- also begins with non obstante clause.
This pro'ision has o'erriding effect o'er Section *+,1-.
Section *+,*- enacts that in relation to the land
acuisition proceedings initiated under 1./+ Act& where
an award has been made fi'e years or $ore prior to the
co$$ence$ent of the *013 Act and either of the two
contingencies is satisfied, 'i1.2 ,i- physical possession of
the land has not been ta!en or ,ii- the co$pensation has
not been paid& such acuisition proceedings shall be
dee$ed to ha'e lapsed. 3n the lapse of such acuisition
proceedings& if the appropriate go'ern$ent still chooses
to acuire the land which was the subject $atter of
acuisition under the 1./+ Act then it has to initiate the
proceedings afresh under the *013 Act. The pro'iso
appended to Section *+,*- deals with a situation where
in respect of the acuisition initiated under the 1./+ Act
an award has been $ade and co$pensation in respect of
a $ajority of land holdings has not been deposited in the
account of the beneficiaries then all the beneficiaries
specified in Section + notification beco$e entitled to
co$pensation under *013 Act.
4 4 4
1/. 5ow& this is ad$itted position that award was $ade
on 31.01.*00.. 5otices were issued to the landowners to
14
Page 15
recei'e the co$pensation and since they did not recei'e
the co$pensation& the a$ount ,6s. *7 crores- was
deposited in the go'ern$ent treasury. Can it be said that
deposit of the amount of compensation in the
government treasury is equivalent to the amount of
compensation paid to the landowners/persons
interested? We do not think so. (n a co$parati'ely
recent decision& this 8ourt in ('o Agnelo Santi$ano
9ernandes and 3rs. '. State of :oa and Anr. ,*011- 11
S88 50;& relying upon the earlier decision in %re$ 5ath
<apur '. 5ational 9ertili1ers 8orpn. of (ndia =td. ,1//;-
* S88 71& has held that the deposit of the a$ount of the
co$pensation in the state>s re'enue account is of no
a'ail and the liability of the state to pay interest subsists
till the a$ount has not been deposited in 8ourt.
4 4 4
*1. The argu$ent on behalf of the 8orporation that the
subject land acuisition proceedings ha'e been
concluded in all respects under the 1./+ Act and that
they are not affected at all in 'iew of Section 11+,*- of
the *013 Act& has no $erit at all& and is noted to be
rejected. Section 11+,1- of the *013 Act repeals 1./+
Act. Sub-section ,*- of Section 11+& howe'er& $a!es
Section ; of the :eneral 8lauses Act& 1./7 applicable
with regard to the effect of repeal but this is subject to
the pro'isions in the *013 Act. ?nder Section *+,*- land
acuisition proceedings initiated under the 1./+ Act& by
legal fiction& are dee$ed to ha'e lapsed where award
has been $ade fi'e years or $ore prior to the
co$$ence$ent of *013 Act and possession of the land is
not ta!en or co$pensation has not been paid. The legal
fiction under Section *+,*- co$es into operation as soon
as conditions stated therein are satisfied. The
applicability of Section ; of the :eneral 8lauses Act
being subject to Section *+,*-& there is no $erit in the
contention of the 8orporation.#
(:/(hasis su((lie)
15
Page 16
18. 0he .u)g/ent of B-!!( =10! ". S(!(# &' H!%!)! 3 O,%
2014 (3 S"A8: 393 was a re-erse case wherein the lan) owner ha)
lost *efore the &igh "ourt. 0he "ourt hel)4
=Su*-section (2 of Section 24 co//ences with a non-
o*stante clause. It is a *eneficial (ro-ision. In -iew of
this (ro-ision% if the (h+sical (ossession of the lan) has
not *een ta6en *+ the Ac,uiring Authorit+ though the
awar) is (asse) an) if the co/(ensation has not *een
(ai) to the lan) owners or has not *een )e(osite) *efore
the a((ro(riate foru/% the (rocee)ings initiate) un)er the
Act% 1894 is )ee/e) to ha-e *een la(se).>
(See also4 B+06! D#"+ 3 O,. ". S(!(# &' H!%!)! 3 O,.4 "i-il
A((eal $os. 38!1-38!6 of 2014 )eci)e) on 14.3.2014
19. In or)er to clarif+ the statutor+ (ro-isions of the Act 2013 with
res(ect to such la(sing% the 3o-ern/ent of In)ia% ?inistr+ of @r*an
;e-elo(/ent% ;elhi ;i-ision% ca/e u( with a circular )ate)
14.3.2014 wherein on the *asis of the legal o(inion of the Solicitor
3eneral of In)ia% it has *een clarifie) as un)er4
=3. I)(#7#(!(+&) &' '+"# %#!, 7#+&*>
=#ith regar) to this issue -iA.% inter(retation
of fi-e +ears (erio) two situations ha-e *een en-isage)
in cases where the ac,uisition has *een initiate) un)er
the 8an) Ac,uisition Act% 1894 -iA.% (1 (arties whose
lan)s ha-e *een ac,uire) ha-e refuse) to acce(t the
co/(ensation an) (2 (arties whose lan)s ha-e *een
ac,uire) ha-ing .ust (arte) with (h+sical (ossession of
the lan). &owe-er% in *oth the a*o-e situations% as on
16
Page 17
1.1.2014% the (erio) of 5 +ears woul) not ha-e en)e) an)
in such cases% the a)-isor+ see6s to clarif+ that the new
law shall a((l+ onl+ if the situation of (en)enc+
continues unchange) for a (erio) that e,uals to or
e'cee)s fi-e +ears. In /+ -iew% it shoul) *e further
clarifie) that in none of the cases the (erio) of fi-e +ears
woul) ha-e ela(se) (ursuant to an awar) /a)e un)er
Section 11 fro/ the )ate of co//ence/ent of the Act
an) that the *enefit of Section 24(2 will *e a-aila*le to
those cases which are (en)ing an) where )uring
(en)enc+% the situation has re/aine) unchange) with
(h+sical (ossession not *eing han)e) o-er or
co/(ensation not ha-ing *een acce(te) an) the (erio)
e,uals to or e'cee)s fi-e +ears.
4. L+0+(!(+&)>
As regar)s this ite/ relating to the (erio) s(ent
)uring litigation woul) also *e accounte) for the (ur(ose
of )eter/ining whether the (erio) of fi-e +ears has to *e
counte) or not% it shoul) *e clarifie) that it will a((l+
onl+ to cases where awar)s were (asse) un)er Section 11
of the 8an) Ac,uisition Act% 1894% 5 +ears or /ore (rior
to 1.1.2014 as s(ecifie) in Section 24(2 of the Act% to
a-oi) an+ a/*iguit+. Since this legislation has *een
(asse) with the o*.ecti-e of *enefiting the lan)-losers%
this inter(retation is consistent with that o*.ecti-e an)
also a))e) as a /atter of a*un)ant caution that the (erio)
s(ent in litigation challenging an awar) cannot *e
e'clu)e) for the (ur(ose of )eter/ining whether the
(erio) of fi-e +ears has ela(se) or not. If the (ossession
has not *een ta6en or co/(ensation has not *een (ai)
)ue to the challenge to the lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings%
the pendente lite (erio) will *e inclu)e) to )eter/ine the
fi-e +ear (erio) an) inclu)ing such (erio) if the awar)
was /a)e fi-e +ears or /ore (rior to the co//ence/ent
of the Act% then the sai) ac,uisition (rocee)ings will *e
)ee/e) to ha-e ela(se) an) fresh (rocee)ings% if so
)esire)% will ha-e to *e initiate) in accor)ance with the
new Act.>
17
Page 18
0he o*.ects an) reasons of the Act 2013 an) (articularl+ clause
18 thereof fortif+ the -iew ta6en *+ this court in the .u)g/ents
referre) to hereina*o-e. "lause 18 thereof rea)s as un)er4
=0he *enefits un)er the new law woul) *e a-aila*le in all
the cases of lan) ac,uisition un)er the 8an) Ac,uisition
Act% 1894 where !.!* -!, )&( 8##) 0!*# &
7&,,#,,+&) &' 6!)* -!, )&( 8##) (!5#).?
(:/(hasis a))e)
20. &owe-er% the aforesai) a((eals ha-e to *e )eci)e) in the light
of a*o-e settle) legal (ro(ositions. 0he a)/itte) facts of the case
re/ains that the 2es(on)ents-0enure &ol)ers ha) file) o*.ections
un)er Section 5A of the Act 1894 as a)/itte) in the affi)a-it file) *+
S/t. @sha "hatur-e)i% ;e(ut+ Secretar+ (8an) Ac,uisition% 8an)
an) <uil)ing ;e(art/ent% Bi6as <hawan% $ew ;elhi% file) in Canuar+
2014 *efore this court. 0he awar) no. 1558!-88 ha) *een /a)e on
5.6.198! an) (ossession has not *een ta6en till )ate though
co/(ensation has *een )e(osite) with the 2e-enue ;e(art/ent%
which cannot *e ter/e) as D)ee/e) (a+/entD as has *een hel) in case
of P1)# M1)+$+7!6 C&7&!(+&) 3 A). (Su(ra.
21. 0herefore% the a((eals are lia*le to *e )is/isse) in ter/s of the
.u)g/ents referre) to hereina*o-e.
18
Page 19
&owe-er% Shri E.E. ?alhotra% learne) AS3% has insiste) that the
/atters shoul) also *e )eci)e) on /erit *+ e'a/ining the correctness
of the .u)g/ent an) or)er i/(ugne).
22. 0he facts are not in )is(ute. A huge chun6 of lan) co-ering 11
-illages was notifie) un)er Section 4 of the Act 1894 in 1980. A
large nu/*er of (eo(le ha) file) o*.ections un)er Section 5-A of the
Act 1894 an) it has *een a)/itte) on oath *+ the officer of the
a((ellant )e(art/ent that in al/ost all these a((eals% the tenure
hol)ers or their (rocessor in interest ha) file) o*.ections un)er
Section 5-A of the Act 1894. 0his is also not in )is(ute that /ost of
the o*.ections were hear) *+ one lan) ac,uisition collector an) after
his transfer% the re(ort ha) *een su*/itte) *+ his successor. In B!6!5
R!0 /17(! ". U)+&) &' I)*+!4 (11! 2005 ;80 !53 (7<% full <ench
of &igh "ourt of ;elhi ,uashe) the lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings in
the sai) case e'clusi-el+ on the groun) that o*.ections file) *+ the
(etitioner therein ha) *een hear) *+ one 8an) Ac,uisition "ollector%
howe-er% the re(ort was su*/itte) *+ another. 0he lan) co-ere) in
these instant a((eals stan) co-ere) *+ the sa/e
notification5)eclaration% sa/e awar) an) the o*.ections ha) *een )ealt
19
Page 20
with *+ the sa/e lan) ac,uisition collector an) the re(ort ha) *een
su*/itte) *+ the sa/e successor.
23. A)/itte)l+% the a((ellants acce(te) that .u)g/ent an) the sa/e
attaine) finalit+ as the sai) .u)g/ent was ne-er challenge) *+ filing
an+ S.8.E. *efore this court. In the light of aforesai) .u)g/ent% a
large nu/*er of writ (etitions ha) *een allowe) an) the lan)
ac,uisition (rocee)ings arising out of the sa/e
notification5)eclaration ha) *een ,uashe). Su*se,uentl+% in A8-#%
R!0 3 O,. ". U)+&) &' I)*+! 3 O,.4 AI2 199! S" 2564% this
"ourt )ealt with the sa/e issue arising out of the sa/e ac,uisition
(rocee)ings an) hel) that the .u)g/ent of ,uashing the ac,uisition
(rocee)ings woul) a((l+ onl+ to the lan) of those (ersons who ha)
challenge) ac,uisition (rocee)ings an) not to all the lan) co-ere) *+
the sai) notification5)eclaration. 0he a((ellants ha) *een un)er the
i/(ression that the .u)g/ent )eli-ere) *+ the full *ench in B!6!5
R!0 /17(! (Su(ra% lai) )own the law a((lica*le to other (ersons
also whose lan) stoo) co-ere) *+ the sai) notification5)eclaration.
24. In D#6-+ A*0+)+,(!(+&) ". /1*+7 S+)2- U8!) 3 O,.4
(2000 ! S"" 296% this court again )ealt with the sa/e ac,uisition
(rocee)ings an) o*ser-e) that if a tenure hol)er ha) not file)
20
Page 21
o*.ections un)er Section 5-A of the Act 1894% he cannot challenge the
ac,uisition (rocee)ings on the groun) that o*.ections ha) not *een
)is(ose) of in accor)ance with law.
25. In O0 P!5!,- ". U)+&) &' I)*+! 3 O,.4 AI2 2010 S" 1068%
this "ourt )ealt with the cases arising out of the sa/e ac,uisition
(rocee)ings% howe-er% this *atch of /atters ha) e'(ressl+ *een
se(arate) fro/ that *atch an) in those cases% the ac,uisition
(rocee)ings were not ,uashe) on the groun) that the ac,uisition
(rocee)ings ha) *een challenge) at a *elate) stage.
26. In the (resent *atch of writ (etitions file) *efore the &igh
"ourt% the /atter ca/e to *e hear) *+ a ;i-ision <ench. 1ne of the
&onF*le Cu)ges -i)e his se(arate .u)g/ent was of the o(inion that the
(rocee)ings woul) not la(se on the groun) that the )eclaration un)er
Section 6 of the Act 1894 ha) *een /a)e after a (erio) of /ore than
three +ears for the reason that it was co-ere) *+ su*-section (2 i.e. on
account of -arious sta+ or)ers (asse) *+ )ifferent courts at )ifferent
ti/es in relations to the sai) (rocee)ings. 7urther% though (rinci(les
of natural .ustice is an in*uilt ele/ent of (roce)ure *ut (er se
-iolation of these (rinci(les woul) not i(so facto -itiate the
(rocee)ings unless an+ (re.u)ice is shown to ha-e *een cause) to the
21
Page 22
(arties% which was not the (lea)e) case of the o*.ectors. Also .u)icial
re-iew of a)/inistrati-e )ecision was i/(ressi*le e'ce(t on -er+
li/ite) groun)s i.e. a*sence of an+ /aterial for/ing the *asis of
)ecision /a6ing an) the courts coul) not go into the ,uestion as to
what /aterial weighe) *efore the authorit+.
0he other &onF*le Cu)ge co/(rising the <ench -i)e his
se(arate an) )issenting .u)g/ent was of the o(inion that the )ecision
in B!6!5 R!0 /17(! (Su(ra was still a goo) law. 1n the issue as to
-ali)it+ of the in,uir+ un)er Section 5-A of the Act 1894% &is
8or)shi( was of the o(inion that in,uir+ un)er Section 5-A of the Act
1894 was a su*stantial right an) coul) not *e ta6en awa+ as a si)e
win). 2el+ing on earlier .u)g/ents of the &igh "ourt of ;elhi% the
&onF*le Cu)ge was of the o(inion that a re(ort on o*.ections shoul)
*e /a)e *+ the sa/e collector who ha) the o((ortunit+ to hear such
o*.ections an) an+ )e-iation woul) -itiate the further (rocee)ings. As
the &onF*le Cu)ges )iffere)% the /atter was referre) to a thir) &onF*le
Cu)ge.
2!. In (ursuance to the a*o-e reference% the /atter ca/e u( *efore
the thir) &onF*le Cu)ge% who )eli-ere) the .u)g/ent cite) as 13!
(200! ;80 14. 2el+ing on the )ecision in /166!7!66+ N!2#,.!!
22
Page 23
R!& (Su(ra% the "ourt was of the o(inion that where the o*.ections
were hear) *+ one collector *ut the re(ort was /a)e *+ another% such
(roce)ure was not in strict co/(liance of re,uire/ents of Section 5-A
of the Act 1894. 0he issue of (re.u)ice cause) to a (art+ in case of
-iolation of (rinci(les of natural .ustice arises in cases )ealing with
un-co)ifie) (roce)ure. 0he /an)ator+ language of Section 5-A of the
Act 1894 /a)e it essential that the collector who hears the lan) owner
/ust su*/it the re(ort an)% hence% no ,uestion of (re.u)ice coul) *e
sai) to *e a((lica*le in )eter/ining the -iolation of (rinci(les of
natural .ustice.
28. In the instant cases% there ha) *een challenge to the ac,uisition
(rocee)ings on -arious groun)s inclu)ing the /anner in which
o*.ections un)er Section 5-A of the Act 1894 ha) *een )eci)e). In
so/e cases% the &igh "ourt allowe) a/en)/ent to the writ (etitions
an) such or)er ha) ne-er *een challenge) *+ the a((ellants. In a case
where on the *asis of su*/issions a)-ance) in the court on *ehalf of
the (arties% the court su//ons the original recor) to fin) out the truth%
(lea)ings re/ain insignificant. In the instant cases% the &igh "ourt
was satisfie) after e'a/ining the original recor) that o*.ections ha)
*een )ealt with in flagrant -iolation of law an) in such a fact-
23
Page 24
situation% the (re.u)ice )octrine for non-o*ser-ation thereof woul) not
*e attracte).
#e )o not see an+ cogent reason to )iffer fro/ such a -iew. $o
.u)g/ent ha) *een *rought to our notice on the *asis of which it can
*e hel) that the )ecision of the "onstitution <ench of this "ourt in
/166!7!66+ N!2#,.!! R!& (Su(ra is not a goo) law.
29. It is e-i)ent fro/ the recor) that in res(ect of a /a.or chun6 of
lan) which stoo) co-ere) un)er the sa/e Section 4 notification% the
lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings ha) *een ,uashe) in a *atch of !4 #rit
Eetitions ha-ing *een file) *efore the ;elhi &igh "ourt an) the
a((ellants% for the reasons *est 6nown to it% )i) not challenge the sa/e
an) resultantl+% the sa/e has attaine) finalit+. 7or a*out a )eca)e
following the sai) .u)g/ent in B!6!5 R!0 /17(! ". U)+&) &' I)*+!
3 O,.4 3! (1989 ;80 150% (rocee)ings in other cases ha-e also
*een ,uashe) an) those )ecisions ha-e not *een challenge) an) ha-e
thus% also attaine) finalit+. A large nu/*er of cases file) *efore this
court an) (articularl+ S8E (" $os. 208% 211 G 212 of 2008 stoo)
)is/isse) -i)e or)er )ate) 10.12.2008% as the (etitioners )i) not ta6e
ste(s to ser-e the res(on)ents therein as is e-i)ent fro/ the 1ffice
2e(ort )ate) 25.6.2013. In such a fact scenario% where in res(ect of
24
Page 25
/a.or chun6 of lan)% the lan) ac,uisition (rocee)ings ha) *een
,uashe) long *ac6 an) which has attaine) finalit+% it is *e+on) our
co/(rehension as to whether the sche/e of (lanne) )e-elo(/ent of
;elhi can *e e'ecute) at such a *elate) stage in -iew of the fact that
-acant lan) in continuous stretch /a+ not *e a-aila*le.
30. In -iew of a*o-e% we )o not see an+ force in these a((eals e-en
on /erit an) the sa/e are lia*le to *e )is/isse). In -iew of the
fin)ings an) (articularl+ in -iew of the inter(retations gi-en to
Section 24(2 of the Act 2013 in the .u)g/ents referre) to herein
a*o-e% it is not necessar+ to entertain an+ other groun) whatsoe-er at
the *ehest of the a((ellants. 0hus% the a((eals are )e-oi) of an+ /erit
an) are )is/isse). $o or)er as to costs.
...@.....@@.@@@@@@@@..J.
9D. B.S. CHAUHAN:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9J. CHELAMES;AR:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9M.A. EBBAL:
N#. D#6-+4
M!% 74 2014
25
Page 26
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1831-183C OF 200D
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Chatro Devi & Ors. . Respondents
#ith
CIVIL APPEAL NO. D03 OF 2010
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Ram Singh Tyagi & Ors. . Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 743D OF 200D
@nion of In)ia G Anr. H. A((ellants

Versus
R.D. Bhanot & Anr. . Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8483 OF 2003
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Hari Ram Kakkar . Respondent
26
Page 27
2
With
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5484-88 OF 2014
9A+,+)2 &1( &' S.L.P.9C: N&,. 24305-2430D OF 2007:
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
K.S. Bakshi & Ors. . Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 548D-D4 OF 2014
9A+,+)2 &1( &' S.L.P.9C: N&,. 208-213 &' 2008:
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Pt. Jai Ram Singh & Anr. . Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 54D5-D8 OF 2014
9A+,+)2 &1( &' S.L.P.9C: N&,. 1085-1088 OF 2008:
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Ranbir Singh & Ors. . Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 54DD-501 OF 2014
9A+,+)2 &1( &' S.L.P.9C: N&,. 2533-2535 OF 2008:
27
Page 28

3
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Moti Lal Bhatia & Anr. . Respondents
O R D E R
1. The facts and issue involved in the abovesaid appeals are
identical and have to be decided in terms of our judgment passed
today in Civil Appeal Nos. 5478-5483 of 2014.
2. The appeals are dismissed in terms thereof. No order as to
costs.
...@.....@@.@@@@@@@@..J.
9D. B.S. CHAUHAN:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9J. CHELAMES;AR:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9M.A. EBBAL:
28
Page 29
N#. D#6-+4
M!% 74 2014
29
Page 30
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4374 OF 200D
@nion of In)ia G 1rs. H. A((ellants

Versus
Geeta Devi . Respondent
O R D E R
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.
In this case the facts are the same as contained in Civil Appeal
Nos. 5478-5483 of 2014, however, it may be mentioned herein that
Shrimati Geeta Devi, the respondent, is the subsequent purchaser of
the land sought to be acquired under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act 1894) and
the original tenure holder had filed objections under Section 5A of the
Act 1894, which have not been considered. The proceedings in this
respect also had been quashed and admittedly, the actual and physical
30
Page 31
2
possession of the land is with the respondent and as the proceedings
had been quashed, the award had been made in 1987-1988. Thus, in
substance the result would be the same as in Civil Appeal Nos. 5478-
5483 of 2014.
The appeal is dismissed in terms of Civil Appeal Nos. 5478-
5483 of 2014. No order as to costs.
@.....@@.@@@@@@@@..J
9D. B.S. CHAUHAN:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9J. CHELAMES;AR:
.......@@@@@@@@@@@J.
9M.A. EBBAL:
N#. D#6-+4
M!% 74 2014
31
Page 32
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 157D OF 2010
Bino) Ia(ur G 1rs. H. A((ellants
Bersus
Union of India & Ors. . Respondents
O R D E R
D. B.S. C-!1-!)4 J.
1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned
judgment and order dated 17.12.2004 passed by the High Court
of Delhi in Civil Writ Petition No. 745 of 1987 and impugned
judgment and order dated 27.7.2007 passed in Review Petition
No.328 of 2005 filed by the appellant wherein the court held
that the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition
32
Page 33
2
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act 1894) was made
within the limitation prescribed under the Act.
2. 0he facts an) circu/stances which ha-e arisen in this
a((eal are that the lan)% the su*.ect /atter of the a((eal% stoo)
notifie) un)er Section 4 of the Act 1894 on 25.11.1980. 0he
other (ersons whose lan) ha) also *een ac,uire) *+ the sa/e
notification ha) challenge) the -ali)it+ of the notification un)er
Section 4 of Act 1894 *+ filing the writ (etitions an) its -ali)it+
was u(hel) *+ the .u)g/ent an) or)er )ate) 15.11.1983. It was
)uring the (en)enc+ of the ac,uisition (rocee)ings that the
(resent a((ellant ha) (urchase) the lan) -i)e registere) sale
)ee)s )ate) 6.5.1985 an) 24.5.1985. In res(ect of the sa/e
lan)% the 8an) Ac,uisition "ollector su*/itte) a re(ort on
4.6.1985 on the o*.ections /a)e un)er Section 5A of the Act
1894 *+ the (re)ecessor-in-interest an) the sa/e was acce(te)
*+ the 8t. 3o-ernor of ;elhi an) the )eclaration un)er Section
6 of the Act 1894 was issue) on !.6.1985. In the +ear
33
Page 34
3
198!-1988% the 8an) Ac,uisition 1fficer /a)e an awar) in
res(ect of the lan).
3. In res(ect of the sa/e lan) co-ere) *+ the sa/e
notification% -arious or)ers in -arious litigations (en)ing *efore
the &igh "ourt ha) *een (asse). 0he writ (etition file) *+ the
(resent a((ellant was )is/isse) -i)e i/(ugne) .u)g/ent an)
or)er )ate) 1!.12.2004.
4. In -iew of the fact that the other lan) co-ere) *+ the
sa/e notification an) )eclaration ha) *een the su*.ect /atter of
-arious other writ (etitions an) (articularl+% the lan) *elonging
to one 3eeta ;e-i% the res(on)ent in "i-il A((eal $o. 43!4 of
2009% the /atter re/aine) (en)ing% thus% 2e-iew Eetition etc.
ha) *een file)% which was )is/isse) on 2!.!.200!.
5. It is e-i)ent fro/ the or)ers (asse) *+ the &igh "ourt
that it ha) grante) sta+ of )is(ossession )uring the (en)enc+ of
the writ (etition as well as the re-iew (etition% though no
interi/ or)er has *een (asse) *+ this court. 0he res(on)ent )i)
not ta6e (ossession of the lan) in )is(ute though awar) ha)
34
Page 35
4
*een /a)e in the +ear 198!-1988% an) the &igh "ourt ha)
)eci)e) against the a((ellant in the +ear 200!. 0hus% a (erio)
of ! +ears has la(se) without an+ sta+ of (rocee)ings an) +et
no action has *een ta6en *+ the res(on)ents in (ursuance to the
awar).
6. &owe-er% 6ee(ing in -iew the )ecision ren)ere) in ".A.
$os. 54!8-5483 of 2014% this a((eal is allowe) in ter/s
thereof. $o or)er as to costs.
@.....@@.@@@@@@@J.
9D. B.S. CHAUHAN:
.......@@@@@@@@@.J.
9J. CHELAMES;AR:
.......@@@@@@@@@J.
9M.A. EBBAL:
N#. D#6-+4
M!% 74 2014
35