ANAND SINGH & ANR. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [2010] 9 S.C.R. 133 · Decided: 28-07-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 9 S.C.R. 133 
ANAND SINGH & ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 2523 of 2008) 
JULY 28, 2010 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.) 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 
A 
B 
ss. 17, 5A and 48(1) - Invocation of urgency clause and c 
dispensation of enquiry u/s. 5A - Notification for land 
acquisition for public purpose-development of residential 
colony - Invocation of urgency clause and dispensation of 
enquiry uls. 5A - Legality of- Challenge to, by appellant-land 
owners - Held: Dispensation of enquiry u/s. 5A by invoking 
D 
s. 17(4) not justified -
No material placed by State 
Government either before High Court or Supreme Court 
warranting elimination of enquiry uls. 5A - There was pre-
notification and post-notification delay - Majority of other land 
owners have received compensation -
Development E 
Authority has already spent Rs. 5,28,00,0001- fordflvelopment 
of the acquired land, and more than 60% of work has been 
completed - Thus, appellants not entitled to de-acquisition 
of land - However, in view of the peculiar facts, appellants 
granted liberty to make representation to State Authorities u/ 
s. 48(1) for release of their land. 
F 
s. 5A - Scope of - Held: s. 5A confers a valuable right 
on owner or person interested to file objections against the 
proposed compulsory acquisition of the particular property for 
public purpose - It also makes the provision for compulsory 
G 
acquisition, just and in conformity with fundamental principles 
of natural justice. 
s. 17(4) - Urgency clause - Invocation of- Dispensation 
133 
H 
134 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 9 S.C.R. 
A of enquiry u/s. 5A - Held: Is an exceptional and extra-ordinary 
power- It should be invoked only when circumstances warrant 
immediate possession - Government has to apply its mind 
on the aspect whether urgency justifies elimination of 
summary enquiry uls. 5A - Upon challenge being made to 
B the use of power uls. 17, Government must produce 
appropriate material before the court on basis of which 
opinion was formed -
Where opinion formed on the 
considerations is not germane to the purpose, judicial review 
of such administrative decision may become necessary -
c Judicial review - Administrative Law. 
D 
'Eminent domain' - Power of - Held: It is acquisition of 
private property by the Government in the public interest, 
general welfare or for public purpose - It is inherent in the 
Government. 
The Gorakhpur Development Authority issued 
Notifications for acquiring certain land including land of 
the appellants for public purpose-development of 
residential colony. The urgency clause uls. 17 of the Land 
E Acquisition Act, 1894 was invoked and the enquiry uls. 
SA was dispensed with. The appellants and other tenure 
holders filed writ petition challenging the Notifications on 
the ground that the urgency clause was invoked 
dispensing with enquiry uls. SA without any basis and that 
F structures and buildings were existing on their respective 
holdings, thus, they were entitled to release of their land 
from acquisition. The High Court upheld the Notifications. 
As regard the prayer for seeking release of their land from 
acquisition uls. 48, the appellants and others were 
G directed to approach the State Government. Therefore, 
the appellants filed the instant appeals. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. In the instant case, the Government 
H completely failed to justify the dispensation of an enquiry 
ANAND SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF UTTAR 
135 
PRADESH & ORS. 
u/s. 5A by invoking s. 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 
A 
1894. The impugned notifications to the extent they state 
that s. 5A of the Act shall not apply suffers from legal 
infirmity. [Para 32] [174-8-D] 
2. 'Eminent domain' is the right or power of a 
sovereign State to appropriate the private property within 
the territorial sovereignty for public uses or purposes. It 
is exercise of strong arm of government to take property 
B 
for public uses without owner's consent. It requires no 
constitutional recognition; it is an attribute of sovereignty 
C 
and essential to the &overeign government. The power 
of eminent domain, being inherent in the government, is 
exercisable in the public interest, general welfare and for 
public purpose. Acquisition of private property by the 
State in the public interest or for public purpose is 
nothing but an enforcement of the right of 'eminent D 
domain'. [Paras 29, 30] [169-C-E] 
Words and Phrases

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.