SRINIWAS RAMNATH KHATOD versus STATE OF MAHARSHTRA AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 255 · Decided: 19-11-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

SRINIWAS RAMNATH KHATOD 
A 
v. 
STA TE OF MAHARSHTRA AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 19, 2001 
[K.T. THOMAS AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894_:.Ss. 4, 6( 1 ), 6(2) and 11-A-Land acquisi-
tion proceedings-Declaration under s.6-Period of limitation-Computation 
of-"Declaration" and "publication"-Distinction between-Held, a "decla-
ration" under s.6( 1) must be made within one year from the last publication 
C 
of Notification under s.4-No time limit fixed for "publication" of declaration 
under s.6(2) as it is merely a ministerial or procedural act-Last date under 
s. 6(2) is only for purposes of computing limitation under s.11 -A. 
Certain lands belonging to appellant were acquired under the Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894. A Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was 
published in the Government Gazette on 21.1.1986. The last publication 
of the said Notification took place on 30.1.1986. Thereafter a declaration 
under Section 6 was issued on 29.1.1987 and was published in the local 
newspaper on 30.1.1987. However, the declaration was published in the 
Official Gazette on 19.3.1987 and in the village concerned on 24.4.1987. 
After issuing notice to appellant nndcr Section 9, a final award was 
passed. Appellant filed a writ petition contending that the 'eclaration 
under Section 6 of the Act had not been published within a period of one 
year from the last date of publication of Notification under Section 4 and 
D 
E 
thus the acquisition proceedings are vitiated and should be set aside. 
F 
Rejecting the said contention, High Court dismissed the writ petition. 
Hence the present appeal. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. The declaration made under Section 6 of the Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894 was within a period of one year from the last date of 
publication of Notification under Section 4. The High Conrt was thus 
justified in holding that the acquisition proceedings were not vitiated. 
Section 6(1) of the Act provides that "declaration must be made" within 
255 
G 
H 
256 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A 
one year from the date of "last publication of notification" under Section 4. 
Thereafter, for publication of said declaration under Section 6(2) no time 
limit has been laid down and it may take place at a later date as it is merely 
a ministerial act. In the instant case, the last publication of notification 
under Section 4 was on 30.1.1986. A declaration under Section 6 was 
B 
admittedly made on 29.1.1987 which was within a period of one year. 
[260-D; 264-B; 262-F] 
c 
D 
1.2. The wordings of Sections 4, 6 and 11-A leave no room for doubt 
that the Land Acquisition Act made a distinction between a "declaration" 
and ''publication". Under Section 4 the notification has to be published. 
Again under Section 11-A the period of two years has to be commuted 
from the date of "publication of the declaration". As distinct from this 
under the first proviso to Section 6(1) "declaration" cannot be made after 
the expiry of one year from the date of "publication of the notification 
under Section 4". The words "published" in clauses (i) and (ii) of the first 
proviso to Section 6(1) refer to the publication of notification under Sec-
tion 4. The proviso lays down that "no declaration (under Section 6) shall 
'be made after expiry of three years [under clause (i)] where the notifica-
tion under Section 4 is published before the commencement of the Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894 and after expiry of one year [under clause (ii)] where 
E 
notification under Section 4 was published after commencement of Land 
Acqnisition Act, 1894. Thus the proviso clearly talks of "publication in 
respect of notification under Section 4 and then provide a time for "mak-
ing of declaration" under Section 6. The legislature is purposely omitting 
to use the words "publication of declaration" in the proviso to Section 6. 
F 
The last date under Section 6(2) is only for the purpose of computing 
limitation under Section 11-A. (262-B-E; 264-A] 
1.3. In the case of Eugenio Misquita this Court has not held that a 
declaration under Section 6 is not complete until it is published in the 
G 
Official Gazette. This question has been left open. Thus, the contention of 
the appellant that declaration under Section 6 is complete only when it is 
published in the Official Gazette within one year of Notification cannot be 
accepted. (261-E; G] 
H 
Eugenio Masquita v. State of Goa, [1997] 8 SCC 47, explained. 
SRINIWAS RA

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