AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In all these Revision Applications a common issue has been raised that the acquiring body has neither given notice under S. 50(2) of the Act nor any opportunity was given to adduce any evidence in respect of the compensation claim.
Case of the petitioners is that they came to know about this Award when the Government Pleader, Narol, called upon the acquiring body to deposit the amount that was awarded to the claimants in each case and, therefore, as soon as they came to know about the same, certified copies were obtained and the present Civil Revision Applications have been filed by the petitioners original acquiring body. The lands have been acquired by the Government for the purpose of acquiring body and therefore, the acquiring body has to pay the compensation that has been determined by the trial Court.
Record of the case was called for and from the record it transpires that no notice has been issued to the petitioners - the acquiring body, nor any opportunity appears to have been given to adduce evidence in respect of the compensation claim as required by S. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act has been amended by the Land Acquisition (Gujarat Unification and Amendment) Act, 1963 (Gujarat Act No. 20 of 1965) and in. S. 50 of the Principal Act, in sub-section (2) for the words ''may appear and adduce evidence'', the words "shall be called upon to appear and adduce evidence, if any" have been substituted. Therefore, so far as Gujarat is concerned, in any land acquisition proceedings held before a Collector or Court, the local authority or Company concerned shall be called upon to appear and adduce evidence, if any. Section 50(2) as amended, clearly casts duty upon the Collector or Court to call. upon the local authority or the Company to appear and adduce evidence, if any. If no notice is issued to the local authority or the Company, as the case may be, to appear and adduce evidence, if any, it would amount ,to denial a reasonable opportunity in spite of mandatory provision of S. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act that "the local authority or Company concerned shall be called upon to appear and adduce evidence if any". Therefore, amended S. 50(2) of the Act clearly casts upon the Court duty to call upon the local authority or the Company concerned to appear and adduce evidence if any. Non issuance of such notice would vitiate the proceedings before the Collector or Court and the Award made in such proceedings would be illegal and violative of principle..,.,. natural justice and such Award would be liable to be-quashed if grievance about non compliance of provision of S. 50(2) of the Act is made by the concerned party.
It would have been quite just and proper to make suitable amendment in S. 20 of the Act, which provides for the service of Notice, by adding the words "and local authority or the Company concerned" in subclause (c) of S. 20. This would have made the position more clear. However, S. 50(2) of the Act clearly casts a duty upon the Collector or the Court to call upon the local authority or the Company concerned, to appear and adduce evidence, if any. Therefore, issuance of notice by the Court to the local authority or the Company concerned calling upon it to appear and adduce evidence if any,, is obligatory. In the instant case, it is apparent that the acquiring body has not been served with any notice and has not been called upon to appear and adduce evidence, if any, so far as the proceedings in the trial Court are concerned. Learned Counsel appearing for the claimants fairlyconceded after going through the record of the case which was called for in the present case, that no notice appears- to have been issued to the acquiring body in the present case and there does not appear that any opportunity was given to adduce evidence. if any, to the acquiring body. The matter has been heard on the question of notice and has not been heard on merit and the above concession has been made by the learned Counsel for the claimants only so far as issuance of notice by the Court was concerned.
In view of the amendment in,S. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, the duty is cast upon the Court to issue a notice to the acanirino body to appear and adduce evidence, if any. Moreover, in view of the. fact that the Government is a party through the Land Acquisition Officer to the acquisition proceedings, it is the moral duty of the Government who is acquiring the land on behalf of the acquiring body to inform the acquiring body about the proceedings in the Court with regard to the determination of amount of compensation so that the acquiring body may appear before the Court and adduce evidence, if any and if it so desires. Apparently, in the instant case no such notice appears to have been issued to the acquiring body, and hence the Award in these cases deserves to be quashed and set aside.
In the result,, these Revision Applications are allowed. The judgment and Award dt. 294-1987 made in Land Acquisition Case No. 124/86 and the judgment and Award'' dt. 1-5-1987 made in Land Acquisition Case Nos. 406 to 408 of 1986, are quashed and set aside, only on this limited ground of nonissuance of notice, as required under S. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act as aforesaid, to the acquiring body Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners will file appearance in the said matters under S. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act on or before 152-1988 and the petitioner will also file written statement, if so desired T hereafter the matter will be heard and disposed of on merit and the parties will be at liberty to produce evidence, if any, in respect of their case. In view of the fact that the Awards were already passed and they are set aside on this limited ground, it will be in the interest of all parties concerned, to direct that the matter be disposed of as early as possible. Hence, it is directed that the matters should be disposed of early as possible preferably by 30-6 1988. Rule is accordingly made absolute in all these Revision Applications. There shall be no order as to costs.
Petitions allowed.