SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2012] 12 S.C.R. 1077 · Decided: 11-10-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2012] 12 S.C.R. 1077 
SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal Nos.7454-59 of 2012 ) 
OCTOBER 11, 2012 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND SUDHANSU JYOTI 
MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - ss.4, SA and 6 - Land 
Acquisition in Union Territory of Chandigarh - Power of the C 
Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh to sanction 
acquisition - Held: Acquisition of land for and on behalf of 
Union Territories must be sanctioned by the Administrator of 
the particular Union Territory - No other officer competent to 
exercise the power vested in 'the appropriate Government' D 
under the Act and the Rules framed thereunder - Nothing in 
language of s.3(1) of the 1987 Act from which it can be inferred 
that the Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh 
could delegate the power exercisable by 'the appropriate 
Government' under the Act which was specifically entrusted E 
to him by the President u!Article 239(1) of the Constitution -
Notification dated 14.8.1989 was issued u!Article 239(1) in 
supersession of all previous notifications relating to the 
exercise of power and functions under the Act by the 
Administrators of various Union Territories - Therefore, even 
F 
if it is assumed that vide Notification dated 25.2.1988 (issued 
u/s.3(1) of the 1987 Act), the Administrator of the Union 
Territory of Chandigarh had authorised its Advisor to exercise 
the power of 'the appropriate Government' under the Act, after 
issuance of Notification dated 14.8.1989, the said delegation 
G 
will be deemed to have ceased insofar as the exercise of 
power of 'the appropriate Government' vnder the Act and the 
Rules framed thereunder is concerned - In absence of fresh 
1077 
H 
1078 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012) 12 S.C.R. 
A delegation by the Administrator, the Advisor could not have 
exercised the power of the appropriate Government - The 
Advisor to the Administrator of the Union Territory of 
Chandigarh was not competent to accord approval to initiation 
of the acquisition proceedings or take decision on the reports 
B submitted by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) u/s.5A(2) and 
record his satisfaction that the land was needed for the 
specified public purpose - Land Acquisition (Companies) 
Rules, 1963 - Chandigarh (Delegation of Powers) Act, 1987 
c 
- s.3(1) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 239. 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - s.5A - Acquisition of land 
- Procedural safeguards - Reports prepared by the Land 
Acquisition Officer (LAO) u/s.5A(2) - If vitiated due to non-
consideration of the objections filed by the landowners - Held: 
0 LAO made misleading and false statement about his having 
seen the revenue records and conducted spot inspection -
That apart, the reports of LAO did not contain any iota of 
consideration of the objections filed by the landowners - Mere 
reproduction of the substance of the objections cannot be 
E equated with objective consideration thereof - Violation of the 
mandate of s.5A(2) writ large on the face of the reports 
prepared by the LAO - LAO failed to discharge the statutory 
duty cast upon him to prepare a report after objectively 
considering the objections filed u/s.5A(1) and submissions 
F made by the objectors during the course of personal hearing 
- The hearing required to be given uls.5A(2) to a person who 
is sought to be deprived of his land and who has filed 
objections u/s.5A(1) must be effective and not an empty 
formality. 
G 
H 
The questions which arose for consideration in the 
present appeals in respect of the land acquisition in 
question in the Union Territory of Chandigarh were, (i) 
whether the Advisor to the Administrator of the Union 
Territory of Chandigarh had the jurisdiction to approve 
SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC. v.1079 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
the acquisition of the appellants' land; (ii) whether the 
A 
reports prepared by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) 
under Section 5A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 
were vitiated due to non-consideration of the objections 
filed by the landowners and the same could not be made 
basis for deciding whether the land was really needed for 
B 
the particular public purpose 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. By notification dated 1.11.1966, the 
President generally delegated the powers and functions C 
of the State Government under various laws in force 
immediately before 1.11.1966 to the Administrator. By all 
other notificatio

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