9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for acquiring the land in question by the Regional and Town Planning Board for planned development in the State of Maharashtra. The facts in CA No. 4925 of 1989 are sufficient for consideration and decision in these appeals. The Act was amended by Amendment Act, 1970 which came into force on 17-2-1971 as Act 14 of 1971. A notification under Section 125 of the Act was published on 28-12-1972. The land could be acquired by agreement with the owner, or making an application to the State Government for acquisition under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Central Act ) in which even by operation of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 126, the declaration has to be made within three years from the date of the publication of notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation under Section 125, the market value has been pegged down to the date of its publication in the State Gazette. Since there lapsed time between the dates of the notification and the declaration, the owner is relieved from the hardship of determination of compensation as per prices prevailing as on the notification under Section 125; and the rise in the market value between the dates of the publication of the notification and the declaration is set off. The legislature while giving power to the State to issue declaration after the expiry of three years or having made the fresh declaration as valid, relieved the owner or person interested in the land from hardship; and the crucial date for determination of the compensation is the date on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resort to the publication of the declaration under sub-section (4) of Section 126. 8. We find no force in the contentions. The legislature being cognizant of the consequences that would flow from long delay in the publication of the declaration in the Official Gazette under sub-section (2) of Section 126, provision was made in that behalf to put a fetter on the exercise of power under Section 126(2) and simultaneously mitigate the hardship to be caused to the public purpose as well as to private interest of the owner of the land. In other words, while permitting the State to exercise its power of eminent domain, the owner of the land or the person interested in the land has been relieved of hardship of payment of the compensation as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e it would be construed that notification under Section 125 does not lapse and fresh declaration made under sub-section (4) of Section 126 is valid, be it is the one made after the Amendment Act came into force or the one made under the unamended Act and three years had expired before the Amendment Act has come into force. The Government was then clearly within its power to have published the declaration under sub-section (2) of Section 126 in the Official Gazette. This conclusion of ours gets fortified from the consideration of the effect of Section 127, as interpreted by this Court in aforesaid case. 11. It is next contended by Dr. N. M. Ghatate that in appeal arising from SLP No. 5251 of 1990 since the award has not been made within t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable per force. 12. In Gauri Shankar Gaur v. State of U. P. ((1994) 1 SCC 92) the U.P. Legislature, while enacting U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, enacted Section 55 and the schedule annexed to the Act making appropriate incorporation therein of the provisions of the Central Act. It was contended that as the Central Amendment Act 68 of 1984 prescribed a limitation of 3 years for publication of the declaration under Section 6, on expiry thereof, the notification under Section 28 of the Adhiniyam stood lapsed. The correctness of the contention and the scope and ambit of Section 55 read with the schedule was considered by one of us (K. Ramaswamy, J.). After exhaustive consideration of the case law on the topic in paras ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the award made by the Collector in that behalf. It is true that there is no express provision under the Act to determine compensation for the land acquired under the Act. Therefore, by necessary implication, compensation needs to be determined by applying the principles in Section 23 of the Central Act. But, there is a distinction between procedural and substantive provisions of a statute. Determination of compensation by applying appropriate principles is relatable to substantive provision, whereas making of award within a prescribed period is basically procedural. So, merely because Section 23 of the Central Act would apply to acquisition under the Act, it is not enough to hold that what is contained in Section 11-A would also apply. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
