9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (7) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal plots Nos. 11 to 25 of Town Planning Scheme No. V of Dariapur, Kazipur Ward. 3. Out of this area the land belonging to the appellants measures about 1694 sq. yds. It is averred by the appellants that this area is predominantly a commercial area and is almost fully built upon . 4. The aforesaid order of compulsory acquisition was published in the official gazette of January 25, 1968 and in the local newspapers of February 10/11, 1968. Individual notices were also served on the concerned parties in accordance with law inviting objections from the owners including the appellants which were lodged in due course. These objections were submitted to the Standing Committee by the Commissioner with his suggestions and the Committee by its resolution No. 1942 of January 21, 1969, approved the said order of compulsory acquisition. The State Government thereafter confirmed the said order on January 6, 1972. 5. The appellants had requested for a personal hearing with regard to their objections and their grievance is that the same was denied to them. It is common ground that no personal hearing was given to the appellants with regard to their objections by the Commissioner. Even so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Judge also noted in his judgment that some of the appellants had in terms demanded a personal hearing in their objections memorandum . Be that as it may Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act does not rest on a person's demand for personal hearing. The matter may be different if a person whose property is acquired abandons the right to a personal hearing with which aspect we are not concerned in this appeal. 11. Although the judgment of the High Court, as stated earlier apparently rests on the assumption that Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act is applicable Mr. Shroff appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that that section is unavailable in the case of acquisition under the Bombay Act, Mr. Sanghi also, fairly enough, has not taken advantage of the assumption in the judgment and has submitted by drawing our attention to the various provisions of the Act that Section 5A is clearly attracted in a matter of acquisition under the Bombay Act. 12. We will, now, examine the rival contentions with regard to the applicability of Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act. 13. The title of Chapter XVI of the Act is Improvement Schemes and opens with Section 270. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Land Acquisition Act as detailed in Appendix I to the Bombay Act. Out of those provisions we are only concerned with Part II (Acquisition) of the Land Acquisition Act containing Sections 4 to 17 including Section 5A. According to Appendix I all the sections in Part II of the Land Acquisition Act except Sub-section (1) of Section 4, Section 6 and Sub-Section (2) of Section 17 are bodily incorporated in the Bombay Act. Those provisions are deemed to be part and parcel of the Bombay Act. Hence Section 5A is clearly a part of the Bombay Act in terms of Appendix I. 18. It is true Section 284 N provides that the incorporated provisions of the Land Acquisition Act are subject to the provisions of Chapter XVI and to those contained in Section 284N itself. That is to say, if there is any inconsistency between a provision in Chapter XVI of the Bombay Act or in Section 284N itself and that in the Land Acquisition Act, the former will prevail over the grafted provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. This is, however, not to say that where Section 5A is deemed to be part of the Bombay Act, there is a further requirement to show in the Bombay Act an express provision for affording an oppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r submit the order as modified by the Standing Committee to the State Government for confirmation. It is manifest that the procedure under the scheme of Schedule C will be breached if the Commissioner does not afford a personal hearing to the objectors even in order to be able to fortify his suggestions which he has to submit to the Standing Committee along with the objections. Since the Standing Committee is entitled to have his properly considered suggestions which may enable it even to modify the order of acquisition it is necessary that the Commissioner gives a personal hearing to the objectors before he is able to make his suggestions worthy in the context of the objections lodged. Otherwise it will be only an empty formality and the suggestions will be devoid of much of practical utility to the Committee. Schedule C, therefore, does not even by necessary implication rule out a right to personal hearing. 21. Clause 2 of Schedule B provides for an appeal to a Judge of the City Civil Court in Ahmedabad and elsewhere to a Judge of the District Court whose decision shall be final. Mr. Shroff submits that provision for an appeal against the acquisition order after confirmation b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Clause 3 to entertain all kinds of objections and it may even refuse to consider the objections mentioned earlier in view of the truncated scope of the hearing under Clause 3(ii) as noted above. We are, therefore, unable to accept the submission that the appeal provided for under Schedule B is a complete substitute for a right to personal hearing and as such by necessary implication ousts the applicability of Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act. 23. Mr. Shroff further submits that under the Appendix I, inter alia, Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act is made applicable in an acquisition proceeding under the Bombay Act. It is, therefore, submitted that under Section 284N, Sub-section (4) any acquisition under the Bombay Act is treated as an acquisition under Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and since Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act is also brought in under the said Appendix, Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, by necessary implication, should be held as excluded from the purview of the Bombay Act. We are unable to accept this submission. Even under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act the appropriate Government has to direct, in a case of urgen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
