BHUTNATH CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 12/01/1955, the government of West Bengal published in the government Gazette a Notification under the Land Acquisition act I of 1894 that : "whereas it appears to the Governor that land in the district of burdwan is likely to be needed for a public purpose, viz. for the development of industries in Durgapur area, notice is hereby given to all whom it may concern that in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894, the governor has authorised the officers and their subordinates for the time being engaged on this undertaking to enter upon and survey land and do all other acts required for the proper execution of their work as provided for or specified in the said section. " appended to the notification was the description of "a. general route" to be followed for the survey of the lands likely to-be needed for the purpose specified. Another notification was published on 12/11/1956, that : "whereas it appears to the governor that land is likely to be needed for a public purpose, x x x it is hereby notified that a piece of land measuring more or less 1860. 92 acres and comprising cadastral plots as detailed x x are likely to be needed for the aforesaid public purpose at the public expenses in the district of burdwan. This notification is made under the provisions of Section 4 of Act I of 1894, to all whom it may concern. " in the notification it was recited that any "person interested in" the land "as are not waste or annable, who has any objection to the acquisition thereof may within thirty days after the date on which public notice of x x thisnotification is given, file an objection in writing before the Collector of burdwan". The notification also recited that in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 as amended by act 38 of 1923 it was directed that the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act shall not apply to the waste or arable portions of the land. The notification was followed by a schedule of a large number of cadastral plots. One more notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was published on 3/06/1958, in respect of certain other lands which were not waste or arable lands.

(2.) Pursuant to those notifications steps were taken for compulsory acquisition of lands belonging to the appellant. The Special Land Acquisition Collector awarded to the appellant, for compulsory acquisition of his land, compensation determined on the basis of the market-value prevailing on January 12, 1955. At the instance of the appellant a reference was made to the district court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The District judge upheld the contention raised by the appellant that compensation payable for the plots of land notified for acquisition ought to be determined on the basis of the market-value prevailing on 12/11/1956 and 3/06/1958.

(3.) The government of West Bengal moved a petition against that order under Article 227 of the Constitution in the High court of Calcutta. In the view of the High court "there was no absolute rule that where there are successive notifications issued under Section 4 compensation must be determined" on the basis of the market-value prevailing on sedate of the last notification. The High court accordingly set aside the order of the district Judge, and directed that the reference be tried according to law and in the light of the findings recorded.