LAXMANRAO BAPURAO JADHAV AND ANR. versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS .

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 161 · Decided: 01-10-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
LAXMANRAO BAPURAO JADHA V AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS . 
OCTOBER 1, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 
s.3-A as inserted by Bombay (Amendment) Act of 1945, ss. 4(1) and 
6(1)-Acquisition of land for constmction of houses for weaker sections of C 
society-Declaration u/s.6(1) publishe~Writ petition challenging the acquisi-
tion allowed by High Court on the ground that compliance with s.3-A was 
not made-Held, the view of the High Court is incorrect-It is the State 
Government that is required to decide whether the land is needed or is likely 
to be needed for public purpose----s. 6 gives a conclusiveness to the public D 
purpose found by the Government on publication of declaration in the 
Gazette. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4165 of 
1988. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.2.87 of the Bombay High 
Court in W.P. No. 1417 of 1984. 
Gopal Balwant Sathe for the Appellants. 
S.M. Jadhav for the Respondent No. 1 and 2. 
D.M. Nargolkar for the Respondent No. 3. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
E 
F 
Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 G 
(for short, the 'Act') was published on June 19, 1982 acquiring lands in 
Survey No. 27/C.1/A/1 admeasuring 1 hectare, 19 acres and 8 tees for 
construction of houses for weaker sections of the society. Notification 
under Section 5-A was issued. The enquiry was conducted and on 
satisfaction that it was needed for public purpose, declaration under H 
161 
162 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 7S.C.R. 
A Section 6 was published on January 17, 1983. After the Land Acquisition 
Officer issued notice under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act, the respondent 
No. 3 filed writ petition in the High Court questioning the validity of the 
notification and the declaration. The contention raised and .0.ccepted by 
the High Court was that since Section 3-A of the Bombay (Amendment) 
B Act, 1945 (22 of 1945) empowers~the officer authorised by the Commis-
sioner to satisfy himself whether' the land is needed for a public purpose 
and siRce the authorised officer had not satisfied in that behalf, the 
Government's power, after the enquiry under Section 5-A, was denuded. 
The Government, therefore, was not right in its conclusion that the land 
1 was needed for a public purpose. We find that the view taken by the 
C High Court is not correct in law. 
On publication of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, 
sub-section (2) envisages that the Land Acquisition Officer or an officer 
authorised specially in this behalf by the Government or any servant or 
D workman shall have lawful authority to enter upon and survey and 
conduct levels of any land in such locality etc. Section 3-A envisages the 
powers of the officers to carry out survey as under : 
E 
F 
G 
H 
"3-A. Preliminary survey of lands and powers of officers to carry out 
survey. - For the purpose of enabling the State Government or the 
Commissioner to determine whether the land in any locality is 
needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose, it shall be 
lawful for any officers of the State Government in the Public Works 
Department, or any other officer either generally or specially 
authorised by the State Government in this behalf, or as the case 
may be, any officer authorised by the Commissioner and for his 
servants and workmen, -
(i) to enter upon and survey and take levels of any land in such 
locality; 
(ii) to marks such levels; 
(iii) to do all other acts necessary to ascertain whether the land 
is adapted for such purpose; and 
(iv) where otherwise the survey cannot be completed and the 
LB.JADHAVv. STATE 
163 
levels taken, to cut down and clear away any part of any standing A 
crop, fence or jungle; 
Provided that no person shall enter into any building or upon 
any enclosed court or garden attached to a dwelling house (unless 
with the consent of the occupier thereof), without previously giving 
such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention 
to do so." 
This is synonymous to the power under Section 4(2) of the Act. 
B 
In addition to the officer authorised under Section 7 of the Act, any 
other officer named in Section 3-A is also empowered even before the C 
notification under Section 4(1) is published to inspect the locality and 
find out whether the land is needed or is likely to be needed for any 
purpose and on such authorisation it shall be lawful 

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