Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Union Of India vs Gopaldas Bhagwan Das And Ors on 27 March, 2018
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, R. Banumathi
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3636 OF 2016
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …Appellant(s)
VERSUS
GOPALDAS BHAGWAN DAS AND ORS …Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. The land of the respondents was acquired vide notification dated
24.10.1975 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act). The
said land was earlier requisitioned in the years 1942 to 1945 for defence
purpose. Award was made in the year 1986 and symbolic possession of the
land was taken on 06.01.1987. Objections of the award were filed by the
respondents against the award. A reference under Section 18 of the Act was
made which was disposed of. Thereafter, the writ petition was filed by the
respondents mainly on the ground that there was no due publication of the
notification under Section 4 of the Act which was a mandatory requirement.
2. The High Court upheld the plea of the respondents relying upon
judgment of this Court in “Kulsum R. Nadiadwala Vs. State of
Maharashtra ” (2012) 6 SCC 348.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that having regard to
the fact that the land was already being used for defence purpose since the
year 1942 to 1945 and the notification under Section 4 issued on
24.10.1975 was challenged for the first time by the writ petition filed on
24.06.2002, the High Court should have dismissed the writ petition on the
ground of delay and laches as entertaining such petition will seriously affect
public interest. It was submitted that view taken in the relied upon
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SWETA DHYANI
judgment ignores the concept of laches.
Date: 2018.03.28
17:07:13 IST
Reason:
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in spite of delay
and laches, this Court in the aforesaid judgment quashed the acquisition.
2
5. We are of the view that delay and laches may be a bar to challenge to
the acquisition after 27 years. In Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Chennai
versus M. Meiyappan and ors (2010) 14 SCC 309 this Court held that in
land acquisition proceedings the Court should not encourage stale litigation
as it may hinder projects of public importance. The contra view in three
Judge Bench decision in Dayal Singh versus Union of India (2003) 2
SCC 593 was held to be in conflict with the Constitution Bench judgment in
Rabindranath Bose versus Union of India (1970) 1 SCC 84 and three
Judge Bench judgment in Printers (Mysore) Ltd. versus M.A. Rasheed
(2004) 4 SCC 460. The said judgment was cited with approval in recent
judgment of threeJudge Bench in Indore Development authority vesus
Shailendra (Dead) through Lrs. & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.20982 of 2017 –
pronounced on 8th February, 2018).
6. In view of above, the view taken by twoJudge Bench in Kulsum R.
Nadiadwala versus State of Maharashtra (2012) 6 SCC 348 to the
effect that delay and laches have to be ignored is not free from doubt.
7. Thus, we are of the view that the matter needs to be placed before a
Bench of three Judges.
8. Accordingly, let the papers be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice
of India for appropriate directions.
…………………………………….J.
(Adarsh Kumar Goel)
…………………………………….J.
(R. Banumathi)
New Delhi;
27th March, 2018.
3
ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.11 SECTION III
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 3636/2016
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
GOPALDAS BHAGWAN DAS AND ORS Respondent(s)
Date : 27-03-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
For Appellant(s) Mrs. Rekha Pandey, Adv.
Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Adv.
Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Tanisha Samanta, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Arya, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Jay Savla, AOR
Ms. Renuka Sahu, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
In terms of the signed order, let the matter be placed before a Bench of three Judges.
(SWETA DHYANI) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER (Signed order is placed on the file)