1987 (5) TMI 370 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of declarations u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act.
2. Applicability and interpretation of the 1984 amendment to the Land Acquisition Act.
3. Impact of court stay orders on the computation of the limitation period for declarations u/s 6.
4. Other contentions raised by petitioners regarding the acquisition process.

Summary:

Validity of Declarations u/s 6:
A large number of writ petitions challenged the validity of certain declarations u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on the ground that they were made after the expiry of the prescribed period. The petitions were heard by a Full Bench due to differing views among judges on the issue.

Applicability and Interpretation of the 1984 Amendment:
The court examined the amendments made by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, which reduced the interval between a Section 4 notification and a Section 6 declaration from three years to one year and introduced provisions for excluding periods during which court orders stayed proceedings. The court rejected the petitioners' argument that the amendments could not apply retrospectively to notifications issued before the amendment came into force.

Impact of Court Stay Orders:
The court held that the period during which any action or proceeding in pursuance of a Section 4 notification is stayed by a court order should be excluded in computing the limitation period for a Section 6 declaration. The court interpreted the stay orders broadly, considering the practical implications and the nature of land acquisition proceedings, which often involve large tracts of land and integrated schemes.

Other Contentions:
The court noted that other contentions raised by the petitioners, such as the applicability of the Master Plan and allegations of mala fide exercise of power, would need to be addressed individually. These contentions would be heard by a Division Bench for final disposal.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the declarations u/s 6 were within the extended limitation period when the stay orders' duration was excluded. The petitions were directed to be listed before a Division Bench for further arguments on other contentions.