NANAPPAN KONTHI Vs. DIST COLLECTOR KOTTAYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners challenge the proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for acquisition of properties mentioned in Ext. P1 notification for expansion of Travancore Electro Chemicals Industries Limited, Chingavanam. The attack is on two counts. First one is that declaration issued under S.6 of the Act was after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of Ext. P1 notification under S.4(1) of the Act, and hence it is invalid. The second ground is that the acquisition for expansion of the existing unit of a company is bit by S.44B of the Act and hence liable to be quashed. I shall proceed to deal with these contentions in detail.

(2.) Ext. P1 notification under S.4(1) of the Act was issued in the Gazette dated 17-2-1987. It was published in Deepika daily on 17-2-1987 and in Malayala Manorama daily on 21-2-1987. S.6 declaration was issued on 7-3-1988. Second proviso to S.6(1) of the Act states that no notification under S.6 shall be made after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of notification under S.4(1) of the Act. Therefore, it is argued that declaration under S.6 of the Act should have been published on or before 20-2-1988, within one year of the date of publication in the Malayala Manorama daily. Since the declaration was issued after the period of one year, i. is stated that the declaration is invalid and the entire proceedings must be quashed.

(3.) Publication of a preliminary notification under S.4(1) of the Act is the first step to be taken for acquisition of any land under the Act. Only after that publication can any officer of the State enter upon the land for measuring the property for fixing boundaries or for doing other acts necessary to ascertain whether the land is adaptable for the purpose for which it is sought to be acquired etc. The power of the officers of the Government to enter upon the land and interfere with the possession of the owner can be exercised only after that publication. Thus, the object of the notification can be taken as one to give a clear notice to the owner of the proposed acquisition and proposed entry of the officers into the land. S.4(1) of the Act makes the notification mandatory. The notification should be effected by three modes. It must be published in the official Gazette. It should also be published in two daily newspapers having circulation in the locality. At least one among the two newspapers must be in the regional language. Over and above these two modes of publication, the Collector should cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the locality. Giving of public notice is mandatory. Thus, it is clear that the notification issued under S.4(1) of the Act without complying with the issue of public notice would invalidate the entire acquisition proceedings.