STATE OF MADRAS SPECIAL TEHSILDAR NO 1 LAND ACQUISITION LIGNITE PROJECT AT VRIDDACHALAM Vs. D NAMASIVAYA MUDALIAR N S KARUPPIAH NADAR KRISHNA NAIR BHAVANI AMMAL MOHAMAD KASIM ROWTHER M SAVARIMUTHU ZACHRIAS PADAYACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether Ss. 2 and 3 of the Madras Lignite (Acquisition of Land) Act XI of 1953 which seek to Amend the Land Acquisition Act I of 1894 in their application to acquisition of lignite bearing lands are invalid because they infringe the fundamental right under Art. 31 of the Constitution or owners of lands whose property is to be compulsorily acquired is the only question which falls to be determined in this group of appeals.

(2.) Investigations conducted by the Geological Survey of India in 1947 revealed deposits of lignite in the South Arcot District of the State of Madras, and exploratory mining operations were commenced by the Government of Madras. Discovery of deposits of lignite led to speculation in lands. On October 6, 1948, the Government of Madras issued a "Press-Note" announcing that the Government proposed to undertake legislation reserving power to compel any person who had purchased land on or after a date to be prescribed in 1947 in the lignite bearing areas to sell such lands to the Government at the rate at which it was purchased. The Government also advised the owners of the lignite bearing lands in the Vridhachalam and Cuddalore taluks not to sell their lands to speculators. On January 7, 1953, the Government of Madras published a Bill to amend the Land Acquisition Act I of 1894 in certain respects. The Bill was duly passed by the State Legislature on June 2, 1953 and received the assent of the President. It was published as an Act on June 10, 1953 and came into force on August 20,1953. By this Act substantially three provisions are made:

(3.) The Madras Act XI of 1953 makes an important departure from the scheme of the Land Acquisition Act I of 1894. Under the Land Acquisition Act I of 1894, a person interested in any land compulsorily acquired is entitled to the market value of his interest in the land at the date of the publication of the notification under S. 4(1), and this compensation includes the value of the improvements agricultural and non-agricultural made in the land upto the date of the notification. By Madras Act XI of 1953 compensation made payable for compulsory acquisition of land is the value of the land on April 28, 1947, together with the value of any agricultural improvements made thereon after that date and before publication of the notification under S. 4(1). The result of the Madras Act is therefore to freeze for the purpose of acquisition the prices of land in the area to which it applies, and the owners are deprived of the benefit of appreciation of land values since April 28, 1947, whenever the notification under S. 4(1) may be issued and also of non-agricultural improvements made in the land after April 28, 1947. Departure from the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act is challenged is illegal on the ground that it deprives the owner of the land of just compensation for compulsory acquisition of his property.