The Punjab & Haryana High Court observed that where the state has entered into any agreement with the private party Section 43 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dilutes the rigours of statutory provisions under Sections 39-42.

The Court was hearing a Writ Petition filed by Petitioner Daljit Singh for quashing of notifications issued under Section 4 and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Lalit Batra observed, “Even if there is no recorded satisfaction by the appropriate government vis-a-vis any purported enquiry, thus detailing thereins, the speakings as enshrined in clauses (supra), as carried in the statutory provisions, borne in Section 40 of the Act of 1894, yet for the reasons to be assigned hereafter, the provisions of Section 43 of the Act of 1894, do come to the forefront. Resultantly, therebys the provisions of Sections 39 to 42 of the Act of 1894 become excluded.”

Advocate Raina S. Thakur appeared for the Appellant.

Brief Facts-

The Government of Punjab issued a notification dated September 10, 2010, to acquire land measuring 22.96 acres, situated at villages in Sectors 97, 106, and 107 of SAS Nagar (Mohali) for setting up a mega project approved by the authorities in favour of the respondent. The purpose was mentioned as “at the expense of the company for public purpose, the planned harmonious and compact urban development of the area”.

The Court questioned whether, according to the agreement entered into between the government and the private respondent, the provisions carried in Section 43 of the Act of 1894, relax and dilute, the rigour of the statutory mandates, carried in Sections 39 to 42 of the Act of 1894.

As per the Court, if the answer to the above question of law is in the affirmative, in terms of Section 40 which mentioned previous enquiry the appropriate government was seemingly not satisfied from an enquiry report or has not recorded any satisfaction, vis-a-vis, an enquiry report however, irrespective of the above, yet in the wake of the provisions embodied in Section 43 of the Act of 1894, the mandate enclosed in Sections 39 to 42 of the Act of 1894, does become ousted or excluded, predominantly in the wake of an agreement arrived at between the developer and the government. Resultantly, thereby the said provisions become ineffective, and noncompliance to the said provisions becomes completely inconsequential.

According to the Court, the primary reason for holding so is banked, upon the fact that there is an agreement between the government and respondent. Therefore, the provisions of Section 43 of the Act of 1894, make inapplicable the provisions as engrafted in Sections 39 to 42 of the Act of 1894. In the sequel, the effect of non-compliance, if any, by the acquiring authority with the statutory mandate enshrined in Section 40 of the Act of 1894, rather assumes no relevance.

The Court stated that when the Mega Housing Project of the respondent was approved by the High Powered Committee under the Chairmanship of the Chief Minister, Punjab, in its meetings along with the issuance of a valid letter of intent vis-a-vis respondent, the launching of acquisition proceedings for a public purpose rather through the aegis of co-respondent, rather does not acquire any vice of any vitiation.

The Court ordered the award to be made by the Collector concerned, in pursuance to the notifications, be made by him in terms of Section 11 of the Act of 1894.

Finally, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition.

Cause Title: Daljit Singh v. State Of Punjab (Neutral Citation:2024:PHHC:050410-DB)


Appellant: Adv. Raina S. Thakur

Respondent: Sr. DAG Maninder Singh, Adv. Sidharth Batra, Adv. Abhinav Sood, Adv. Achintaya Soni

Click here to read/download Judgment