Summary
The Indore Development Authority published Town Development Scheme No. 97 in June 1984 under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, negotiated with landowners, and within three years asked the State to acquire the land, after which an award was made in 1991. The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed the scheme as lapsed under Section 54 and the acquisition for want of delegation under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and for discriminatory release of large areas. The Supreme Court allowed the Authority's appeals: Section 54 speaks of failure to 'commence implementation', which substantial steps within three years satisfy; the Collector, delegated powers under Sections 4, 5, 6 and 17 and himself the Collector under Section 3(c), validly heard objections; and the releases were for valid reasons and left the scheme's integrity intact.
Issues
- Whether a town development scheme lapses under Section 54 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 if it is not fully implemented within three years of final publication, or only if no substantial steps towards implementation are commenced within that period.
- Whether acquisition proceedings are vitiated because the State's delegation order to the Collector did not expressly mention Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether release of parts of the scheme land from acquisition rendered continuation of the acquisition against the remaining owners discriminatory under Article 14.
Provisions considered
- Sections 50, 54 and 56 read with Rule 19 of the 1975 Rules, Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973Section 54 requires only that implementation be commenced within the stipulated period, and Section 56 read with Rule 19 directs the Authority to 'proceed to acquire', not to complete acquisition, within three years; following Sanjai Gandhi Grah Nirman Sahkari Sanstha, a scheme lapses only if it lies idle, not where substantial steps including negotiations and a request for compulsory acquisition were taken. (¶¶ 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Sections 3(c), 4, 5A and 6, Land Acquisition Act, 1894The State delegated powers under Sections 4, 5, 6 and 17 to the Collector as Deputy Secretary; omission of Section 5A does not vitiate the declaration, since objections are to be considered by the Collector of the District as defined in Section 3(c) and the Section 6 declaration followed consideration of the report, as held in Gajanan and Adarsh Nagar. (¶¶ 12, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3)
- Article 14, Constitution of IndiaRelease of land for housing societies that had developed or held ceiling exemptions before final publication, for agricultural or regional park use, or in response to Section 5A objections, was for valid reasons and not an undue favour; it reduced the area but not the integrity of the scheme. (¶¶ 13, 13.1)
Held
- Between the final publication on 08.06.1984 and the request to the State on 04.06.1987 the Authority took various steps including negotiations for acquisition by agreement, and on their failure approached the State under the Land Acquisition Act; the High Court adopted too narrow a meaning of Section 54, under which large schemes could never be undertaken, and erred in declaring the scheme lapsed. (¶¶ 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Of the land covered by the scheme over sixty-eight per cent has been developed and some has been used as a park, the undeveloped portion being held up by interim orders; the release of specified areas was explained and not arbitrary, so the third ground for quashing does not stand. (¶¶ 13, 13.1)
Result
Appeals allowed without costs; Madhya Pradesh High Court Division Bench judgment dated 28.08.2014 and the Single Judge's judgment dated 10.12.1998 declaring Scheme No. 97 lapsed under Section 54 of the Adhiniyam and quashing the acquisition proceedings set aside.