LexNATIONAL COAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION versus MANMOHAN MATHUR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
I 409 A NATIONAL COAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. MANMOHAN MATHUR January 15, 1970 B [M. HIDAYATULLAH, C. J., J. M. SHELAT, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, A. N. GROVER AND A. N. RAY, JJ.] c D E F G Retrospective Legislation-Acquisition held invalid by High Court as notificution required under s. 7 Coal IJearing Areas (Acquisition and De"·e- Jopment) Act (20 of 1957) not issued-No_tificaAfon deetn!!d to hare been issued by provisions of Amending Act, 23 of.1969-Ef!ect. A notification stating that ·1he respondent's lands \Vere needed for pros- pecting caal, was issued under s. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894. No objection under s. 5A of the Act was made by the respondent. There- after the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act. 1957. came into force. Under s. 28 of the 1957-Act, all notifications and objec- tions,made under the Land Acquisition Act were deemed to be notifications and objections under the 1957-Act. Section 7 of 1957-Act requires the issue of a notification before acquisition under s. 9 ( 1) of that Act. In the present case, the Central Government acquired a certain area on behalf of the appellant under s. 9 o'f the 1957-Act, from the area notified under s. 4( 1) of the Land Acquisition Act without issuing th~ s. 7 notification. ~fhe respondent challenged the acquisition by a writ petiti.on and the High Court allowed it. While the appeal against the judgment of-the High Court was pending in this Court, the 1957-Act was amended hy the Coal Bearin~ Areas (Acquisition and Development) An1cndment Act, 1969. The conse- quences of the amendments introduced by the AmenJn1ent Act are that if no ohj~ction had been preferred under s. 5A of the Land Acquisition Act wi~hin the period specified, then it shall he deemed that a notification under s. 7 of the Act 1957-Act has been issued; that no objection to the acquisi- tion of the land under s. 8 of the 1957-Act has been preferred; and that the Government could therefore make the acquisition under s. 9 of the 1957- Act. Also, the effect of a decision of a court was removed as if the amend- ed Act was in force at all material time. HELD : Legislation making obligatory notifications fictional may not be proper, but since Parliament was competent to make such fictions, the acquisition could not be questioned. [414 A-BJ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1639 of 1966. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated November 15. 1965 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 66 of 1965. Jagadish Swarup, Solicitor-Genera/, S. K. Dho/akia amd R. H. H · Dhebar, for. the appellants. W. S. Bar/ingay, D. p. Verma, R. Mahalingier and Ganpat Rai, for the respondent. 410 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1970} 3 S.C.R. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bidayatullah, C.J. The National Coal Development Corpora· lion Ltd. appeals against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, November 15, 1965, in an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution. By the judgment under appeal the appellants are restrained' from carrying on depillaring opera- tions underneath the land of the respondent Manmohan Mathur in village Chirimiri in District Surguja in Madhya Pradesh. The facts are as follows : Chirimiri is a coal-bearing area. On February 1, 1957 the Government of Madhya Pradesh, acting in exercise of the functions of the Central Government under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 entrusted to it by the President under Art. 258 ( l) of the Constitution, issued notification under s. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act stating that the lands specified in Chirimiri village were needed for the prospecting of coal seams for development of collieries by the Central Government. On June 8, 1957 the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act (XX of 1957) was enacted and was brought into force. On Augu<t 7, 1958 the Central Government purporting to act under s. 9(]) of Act XX of 1957 issued a notification acquiring land measuring 145-75 acres described in the notification. In that noti- tication it was stated that no objection was received after the noti-· fication under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. On April 16, 1964 the appellant gave notice to the respondent that he should vacate the said land within 30 days of the receipt of the notice and any super-structure and material that may be on that land be re- moved. It was also stated that the mining rights in village Chirim
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.