H.M. KELOGIRAO AND ORS., ETC versus GOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 245 · Decided: 24-09-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, K. VENKATASWAMI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

H.M. KELOGIRAO AND ORS., ETC. 
A 
v. 
GOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 24, 1997 
[DR. A.S. ANAND AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.] 
B 
Land Acquisition Act,, 1894 : Section 4(1), 5A, 6, 9, 17(4) and 18. 
Land Acquisition-Purpose to construct a bus stand-Publication of 
notification and declaration-Possession of land taken over soon thereafter- C 
Bus stand constructed thereon-Landowners filed their objections under 
section 9 claiming enhanced compensation but no grievance made about 
invalidity of notice under section 9 or of earlier proceedings-Land owners 
also participated in the award enquiry-Held in such circumstances land 
acquisition proceedings cannot be quashed-Land stood vested in the State D 
of which possession had been taken two decades ago cannot be returned to 
landowners-As the appellants had not accepted the award and have not 
taken recourse to proceedings under section 18, they may seek reference 
within six weeks-No objection with regard to limitation shall be raised 
against them. 
State ofRajasthan and Ors. v. D. R. Laxmi and Ors., !199616SCC445 
and Senjeevanagar Medical & Health Emp/oyess' Coop. Society v. Mohd. 
Abdul Wahab, [1996] 3 SCC 600, relied on. 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 52I 7of1993 
. fu. 
F 
From the Judgment and Order dated 28. 4. 89 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court.in W.P. No. 4637 of I 987. 
Raju Ramachandran, D. Rama Krishna Reddy, Guntur Prabhakar, L. 
Nageswara Rao, B. Parthasarthi and A. Subba Rao for the appearing parties. G 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
These two Civil Appeals by special leave are directed against the 
common judgment of the High Court of judicature at Andhra Pradesh dated 
28th April, 1989. 
245 
H 
246 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
The relevant facts for disposal of these appeals are: 
That land measuring 9 .87 cents comprising in various survey numbers 
of Anantapur Town were sought to be acquired by the Government at the 
request of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter 
'the Corporation') for purposes of constructing a bus stand at Anantapur. 
B The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter 
'the Act') was published on 31th May 1979. Simultaneously, declaration 
under Section 6 of the Act was also published and emergency provisions 
under Section 17(4) of the Act were invoked and the enquiry under Section 
SA of the Act was dispensed with. It appears, that some of the land owners 
C challenged the acquisition proceedings through Writ Petition Nos. 980 I of 
1983 and 8133 of 1985 in respect of Survey Nos. 2067/4A, 2071/IA and 151/ 
I B. The thrust of the challenge was that the substance of the Notification 
which was required to be published at a public place as required by law had 
nut been published. Writ Petition No. 9801 of 1983 was allowed on 18th 
October, 1985 while Writ Petition No. 8133 of 1985 was allowed by the learned 
D Single Judge on 12th March, 1986. 
The Notification which was the subject matter of challenge in the two 
writ petitions was quashed in respect of survey numbers detailed in each one 
of the two writ petitions. Jn so far as the appellants herein are concerned, they 
E v1::rt n0t parties to either of the writ petitions. A notice under Section 9 of 
the Act was issued on i 7th March, 1987 and was served on the appellants 
on 23rd March, 1987. All the appellants filed objections to the notice on 3rd 
April, 1987 before the Land Acquisition Officer claiming enhanced 
compensation at the rate of Rs. 250 per sq. feet. Award enquiry was held in 
which admittedly all the appellants participated. The Award enquiry was 
F completed on 5th April, 1987 and on 10th April, 1987 the Land Acquisition 
Collector made his Award fixing the market value of the land in question at 
the rate of Rs. 33,000 per acre. Aggrieved, the appellants filled writ petitions 
in the High Court on 14th April, 1987. In the writ petitions the main fubmission 
was that since the Notification issued under Section 4 of the Act had been 
G quashed in writ Petition Nos. 980 I of 1983 and 8133 of 1985, the notice issued 
under Section 9 of the Act was invalid and as such all further proceedings 
were also void. Counter was filed in the High Court by the Corporation 
wherein it was stated that the Corporation had taken possession of the land 
soon after the Notification under Section 4(1) and the declaration under 
Section 6 of the Act had been pu

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