STATE OF GUJARAT versus BHOGILAL KESHAVLAL & ANR.

STATE OF GUJARAT versus BHOGILAL KESHAVLAL & ANR.

Where an initial notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is invalid as compensation was to be paid by a society and not out of public revenues, the State Government, upon cancelling such invalid notification, remains empowered to issue a fresh valid notification under Section 6, provided the acquisition is expressly for a public purpose at public expense; delay between cancellation and re-notification was not unreasonable on these facts, nor was a fresh Section 4 notification necessary.

Parties
Appellant: State of Gujarat; Respondent 1: Bhogilal Keshavlal; Respondent 2: Sri Ayodhya Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 November 1979
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Gujarat High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Successive Notifications Under Section 6, Public Purpose in Land Acquisition, State Power to Cancel and Reissue Notifications, Acquisition for Co Operative Housing Societies
Land Acquisition Administrative Law Constitutional Law Successive Notifications Under Section 6 Public Purpose in Land Acquisition State Power to Cancel and Reissue Notifications Acquisition for Co Operative Housing Societies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Gujarat

Appellant

Bhogilal Keshavlal

Respondent 1

Sri Ayodhya Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.

Respondent 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Gujarat High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the State Government could issue a fresh notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 after cancelling a previous invalid notification
  2. 2 Whether acquisition of land for a co-operative housing society amounts to 'public purpose'
  3. 3 Whether there was unreasonable delay in issuing the second notification under Section 6

Ratio Decidendi

Where an initial notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is invalid as compensation was to be paid by a society and not out of public revenues, the State Government, upon cancelling such invalid notification, remains empowered to issue a fresh valid notification under Section 6, provided the acquisition is expressly for a public purpose at public expense; delay between cancellation and re-notification was not unreasonable on these facts, nor was a fresh Section 4 notification necessary.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the High Court set aside
  • Writ petition of first respondent dismissed