1989 (1) TMI 360 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of simultaneous publication of notifications u/s 4(1) and u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 after the amendment by Act No. 68 of 1984.
2. Interpretation of amendments to Sections 4, 6, and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of Simultaneous Publication of Notifications u/s 4(1) and u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Post-Amendment

The appeals arise from the decision of the High Court of Allahabad, which quashed the notifications issued by the State Government under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for acquiring land for public purposes. The High Court held that after the amendment by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, the declaration under Section 6 could not be made on the same day as the notification under Section 4(1). The High Court found that prior to the amendment, it was permissible for the government to issue and publish both notifications simultaneously. However, after the amendment, Section 17(4) required that the declaration under Section 6 could only be made "after the date of publication of the notification" under Section 4(1).

Issue 2: Interpretation of Amendments to Sections 4, 6, and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

The Supreme Court examined whether the amendments necessitated a change in the legal position regarding simultaneous publication. The Court noted that the amendments to Sections 4 and 6 introduced specific publication requirements, including in newspapers and public notices in the locality. The change in Section 17(4) to "after the date of the publication of the notification" was argued to be a consequence of these amendments. However, the Court found that the language used indicated a legislative intent to require a time gap between the notifications under Sections 4 and 6, even in cases of urgency. The Court held that the words "after the date of the publication of the notification" in Section 17(4) must be given their plain meaning, which precludes simultaneous publication.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, concluding that the simultaneous publication of notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act was invalid post-amendment. The appeals were dismissed, affirming that the declaration under Section 6 must follow the publication of the notification under Section 4(1) by at least one day.