REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER KOZHIKODE Vs. KUNHI MADHAVI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State against the decision in o. P. No. 739 of 1959. The decision relates to two notifications issued by the government, Exts. A and D, under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It ordered that Ext. A should be quashed in so far as it directed that the provisions of s. 5-A shall not apply, and Ext. D in its entirety.

(2.) EXT. A, omitting the schedule thereto, reads as follows: "whereas it appears to the Government of Kerala that the land specified in the schedule below is needed for a public purpose, to wit for the construction of a Rural dispensary, notice to that effect is hereby given to all whom it may concern in accordance with the provisions of S. 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (Central Act I of 1894) and the Government of kerala hereby authorise the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kozhikode, his staff and workmen to exercise the powers conferred by S. 4 (2) of the said Act. Under sub-section (4) of S. 17 of the Act the Government of Kerala direct that in view of the urgency of the case the provisions of S. SA of the Act shall not apply to this case". The contention which has been accepted in the judgment under appeal is that EXT. A does not show whether the Government was of the opinion that the provisions of sub-section (1) or of sub-section (2) of S. 17 were applicable, and that as a result the notification in so far as it directed that the provisions of section-5a shall not apply was not in order and cannot be sustained.

(3.) IN AIR. 1960 SC. 1203 a notification under S. 4 which did not state that the land sought to be acquired was needed for a public purpose came up for consideration. All that the notification said was: "whereas it appears to the Government of Bombay that the lands specified in the Schedule hereto are likely to be needed for the purposes of the company, viz. , for factory buildings, etc. of M/s. Mukund Iron and Steel Works Limited, Bombay; it is hereby notified under the provisions of S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (I of 1894), that the said lands are likely to be needed for the purpose specified above". The Supreme Court said: "in our opinion, it is not absolutely necessary to the validity of the land acquisition proceedings that that statement should find a place in the notification actually issued. The requirements of the law will be satisfied if, in substance, it is found on investigation, and the appropriate Government is satisfied as a result of the investigation that the land was needed for the purposes of the Company which would amount to a public purpose under Part VII, as already indicated".