Land once Vested with State cannot be De-requisitioned, no further Acquisition Proceedings lie under Land Acquisition Act: Calcutta HC [Read Order]

In a major ruling the Calcutta High Court observed that the land once vested with State cannot be de-requisitioned and no further acquisition proceedings lie under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The Additional Government Pleader who appearing for the State submitted that, the land in question was acquired by a proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a public purpose at the instance of the requiring body namely BDA. It was further contended that the possession of the entirety of the land, including the plots involved in the seven writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners, were taken on April 2, 2007.

The submission was concluded by stating that the possession of the land being taken and award thereof being published, the land stood vested with the State. Accordingly, the question of divesting the land involved in the writ petitions does not arise.

The advocate who appeared for the writ petitioners submitted that the State never took possession of the land in question. His clients are still in actual physical possession thereof and that, no Panchnama as was envisaged in Indore Development Authority (supra) was prepared. The so-called making over of possession by the State to the requiring body is not a document to establish that, State took possession of the property concerned from the writ petitioners.

The counsel also referred to the provisions of the West Bengal Land Acquisition Manual, 1991. He refers to Chapter XI relating to taking of delivery of possession and in particular to Rule 139 and 143 thereof. He submits that, possession of the property in question was not taken in accordance with the mode of taking possession specified under the Land Acquisition Manual, 1991.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi observed that “We find from the records that, NHAI issued a notification under Section 3C of the Act of 1956 did not proceed to include the plots involved in the subsequent notification under Section 3D of the Act of 1956. NHAI, therefore, corrected themselves with regard to the plots concerned. Land once vested with State cannot be derequisitioned nor any further acquisition proceedings lie. In the present case, land stood vested under the Act of 1894 and as such revocation of the Act of 1956 was non-est. No right flows from the revocation of the Act of 1956.”

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates