Madras High Court
P.C. Thanikavelu vs The Special Deputy Collector For Land ... on 10 March, 1989
Equivalent citations: AIR1989MAD222, AIR 1989 MADRAS 222, (1990) 1 LJR 142 1989 TLNJ 107, 1989 TLNJ 107
Author: S. Mohan
Bench: S. Mohan
JUDGMENT S. Ramalingam, J.
1. The question for consideration is whether at the stage of enquiry under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, a person whose name is not entered in the revenue records as a person interested in the land, is entitled to notice of the enquiry when the officer conducting the enquiry is informed of the interest possessed by such person in the land.
2. Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act contemplates publication of the notification in the Official Gazette by the appropriate Government that land in any locality is needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose. Besides such publication in the Official Gazette, the section also contemplates publication of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality. These provisions have been held to be mandatory.
3. The purpose and object of making such publication and causing such notice to be given is to enable all persons interested in the land to put forth their objections, if any, to the acquisition.
4. Section 5A contemplates an enquiry to be conducted by the Collector into any objections that may be made against the proposal to acquire the lands.
5. In exercise of powers under Section 55 of the Act, Rules have been made and Rule 1 of these statutory Rules contemplates giving of public notice of the substance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act in the locality. The Land Acquisition Manual which contains executive instructions states : --
"Besides publishing the notice as prescribed in Rule 1 of the Appendix, the Collector-should see that the individual notices are served as far as possible on every person believed to be interested in the land to be acquired in the manner prescribed by Sub-sections. (3) and (4) of Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894."
6. It is not in dispute that in all oases where emergency provisions are not invoked and an enquiry under Section 5A of the Act is contemplated, the Collector causes individual notices to be served on every person known or believed to be interested in the land to be acquired. Normally, such notices are sent to persons whose names are found recorded in the revenue records as persons interested. But in several cases it may transpire that persons whose names are found recorded in the revenue records as interested persons may cease to have such interest by reason of transfers of the holding or otherwise. Nevertheless, no mutation of names in the revenue records in favour of persons who have become interested in the land might have been effected. The result is that the Collector may cause individual notices to be served only on those persons whose names are found in the revenue records, but who have ceased to be interested in the land. The result is not far difficult to see. Such persons who have ceased to be interested in the land may not respond to the notice, nor would they care to participate in the enquiry to be held under Section 5A of the Act. In such cases, the statutory enquiry under Section 5A of the Act which has not been dispensed with, would be completed without affording a reasonable opportunity to the persons who have an existing right in the land under acquisition. Though it is incumbent upon the Revenue to -keep their records up to date by effecting mutation of names reflecting the actual state of affairs by showing the persons really interested in the land in their records, yet in a few cases it may so happen that the revenue records are not made up to date and the person who is really interested in the land may not receive any notice from the Collector for the enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. In such cases, if it is brought to the notice of the Collector by the erstwhile land owner or by any other person including the present owner thereof, of the names of interested persons, the Collector as a statutory functionary cannot decline to afford an opportunity to the person who is really interested in the land and, close the enquiry. When such information is brought to the notice of the Collector, it is needless to say that the principles of natural justice enjoin upon him an obligation to issue notice to the person who is found to be really interested in the land even though his name may not be found entered in the revenue records. It is true that the Government has the prerogative to acquire lands belonging to individuals for a public purpose sanctioned under the theory of 'eminent domain'. But the rule of law which governs and controls the executive functions in the thread that runs through the fabric of constitutional democracy, the rule of law behoves the Government to act fairly and reasonably and the principles of natural justice are the quintessence of such fair play and reasonableness. The decision reported in Padmavathi v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1978) 91 Mad LW 80 does not reflect the true statement of law. The Supreme Court has held in Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. Union of India, that even in the absence of express reference to observance of principles of natural justice, such principles should be followed whenever it affects the rights of parties. It cannot be gainsaid that when the lands of an individual are acquired, albeit he may be paid compensation, his civil rights may be affected. It is therefore elementary that, to be consistent with the principles of natural justice, such a person should be put on notice before his lands are acquired and his objection heard and considered. The enquiry contemplated under Section 5A of the Act would be full and complete only when the person who is really interested in the land is put on notice. But, at the same time, it is made clear that individual notice is mandatory only to those persons whose names are found in the revenue records or who are found by the Collector as persons interested on information received through reliable source.
7. The reference to the Full Bench is answered accordingly.