Land Acquisition Ruling: Court Emphasizes Fair Hearing and Compliance with Legal Procedures.
07 March 2025
Land Acquistion >> Property & Real Estate
In a significant ruling of Shree Nasik Panchavati Panjrapole, Through its Managing Trustee, Hitesh Ramji Javeri, Mumbai & Ors. Vs The District Collector Nashik & Ors., the High Court quashed an impugned Award concerning land acquisition under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the Act). This decision emphasizes the necessity of adhering to prescribed legal procedures in land acquisition, including providing adequate notice and the opportunity for a personal hearing to affected parties.
Background:
The Petitioners, owners of land admeasuring 17,955 square meters in Survey No. 288/3, Nashik, challenged the Award passed on November 23, 2023, by the Collector in Land Acquisition Case No. 05 of 2022. The Petitioners argued that the legal procedures prescribed under the Act were not followed, particularly the requirement for a minimum 30-day period to file objections and attend a personal hearing before the Collector.
Key Issues:
The primary contention was the inadequate notice given under Section 21(2) of the Act, which mandates that interested persons be given at least 30 days to file objections and attend a personal hearing before the Collector. In this case, the notice dated June 16, 2023, provided the Petitioners only 11 days to respond, which was significantly less than the prescribed period.
The Petitioners' counsel, Mr. Ahuja, argued that this violation of the statutory requirement vitiated the award and should render the acquisition proceedings invalid. He cited the case of Tirupati Developers Vs. The Union of Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli & Ors. to support his stance.
Respondents' Argument:
In response, Mr. Dighe, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the Respondents, noted that the Petitioners had filed objections on July 3, 2023, despite the short notice. Furthermore, although neither the Petitioners nor their advocate appeared for the personal hearing scheduled for June 27, 2023, the objections were considered, and a draft award was prepared. The Respondents argued that there was substantial compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the Petitioners had not been prejudiced by the lack of a hearing.
Court’s Ruling:
The Court, while acknowledging that the Petitioners had filed objections and the Collector had considered them, found that the procedural requirement for a personal hearing had not been met. Under Section 21(2) of the Act, the law mandates that interested parties be given a clear opportunity to be heard before the final award is made. In this case, no such opportunity was provided.
The Court cited the Supreme Court's decision in Tirupati Developers, where the importance of adhering to the statutory process for land acquisition was emphasized. It noted that the right to be heard is fundamental to ensuring a fair and just determination of compensation, and any deviation from this procedure could undermine the fairness of the acquisition process.
Furthermore, the Court referenced another Supreme Court ruling in Kolkata Municipal Corporation vs. Bimal Kumar Shah, which highlighted that the State must respect constitutional rights related to property acquisition. The Court underscored the need to follow the procedural safeguards laid down in the law, including giving affected parties the right to present their case.
Decision:
Ultimately, the Court quashed the impugned Award, setting aside the land acquisition decision made on November 23, 2023. It directed the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) to grant the Petitioners a fresh hearing on March 21, 2025, and to issue a new Award by April 30, 2025. The Court also accepted the Petitioners' statement that they would withdraw the reference initiated under Section 64 of the Act for enhanced compensation, which was based on the now-quashed Award.
Conclusion:
This judgment reinforces the importance of following the procedural safeguards in land acquisition laws to ensure fairness and transparency. It serves as a reminder that the rights of affected parties must be respected, particularly when it comes to providing adequate time for objections and a fair hearing before the final award is issued. The ruling not only underscores the legal obligations of authorities under the Act but also affirms the fundamental right of individuals to be heard when their property is at stake.
Section 21, LAND ACQUISITION ACT - 1894