Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

45. It is submitted that on 25th October 2019, the Collector (Respondent No.5), in furtherance of his purported powers under Respondent No.1's notification dated 19th January 2015 issued a notification under Section 11(1) of the Fair Compensation Act, inter alia, stating that the Subject Plot was required for public purpose, i.e. the Bullet Train Project. This notification has been impugned in the Petition as the Second Impugned Notification. The Second Impugned Notification purports to exempt the Bullet Train Project from applicability of provisions of Chapter II and Chapter III of the Fair Compensation Act in exercise of its powers under Section 10A of the Fair Compensation Act, as amended by the Maharashtra Amendment.

96. It is submitted that the Maharashtra State Government, in exercise of the powers entrusted under the Presidential Notification dated 9th August 2019 cannot go beyond the scope of its entrustment, and exempt the Bullet Train Project from the application of Chapters II and III of the Fair Compensation Act by invoking Section 10A. He relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of H. Anraj & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 2 SCC 292, para 8.

97. It is submitted that the Presidential Notification makes it abundantly clear that the Government of Maharashtra can act only as a delegate of the Central Government for purposes of the Bullet Train Project, including for the acquisition of land. However, by the First Impugned Notification, the State Government has in purported exercise of its powers under Section 10A, exempted the Bullet-Train Project from the application of the provisions of Chapters II and III of the Fair Compensation Act. The Central Government (as "appropriate Government" for the Bullet Train Project, whether in consultation with the state government or otherwise) is confined to the provisions of the central statute. It is therefore not entitled to exercise powers under Section 10A of the Fair Compensation Act, either directly or indirectly through a delegate.

171. It is submitted that the Notification dated 9th August, 2019 under which the State Government has been declared as an Appropriate Government is an independent empowerment. The said Notification has been issued by Respondent No.2 in exercise of its powers under Article 258 (1) of the Constitution of India. The said provision is unconnected with the Maharashtra Amendment and the exercise of powers by the State Government under Section 10A. The Maharashtra Amendment is wide and is not confined to the Bullet Train Project whereas the said Notification dated 9th August, 2019 is specifically for the Bullet Train Project.

193. It is submitted that under the provisions of the Fair Compensation Act, under Section 3(e)(iv), the Central Government is the appropriate government for the acquisition of land for a multi-state project (such as the Bullet Train Project). Thus, only the Union/ Central Government could acquire (and take steps towards the acquisition of) land for the Bullet Train Project. It is submitted that in order to enable the State of Maharashtra to acquire land for the Bullet Train Project, the Union necessarily had to entrust its power to the State of Maharashtra to acquire land on the Union's behalf. This was done by the exercise of the Union's powers under Article 258(1) of the Constitution of India.