w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Bhushan Power & Steel Limited v/s Kaniska Engineering Industries Limited & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- BHUSHAN POWER & STEEL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27100DL1999PLC108350

Company & Directors' Information:- A. K. POWER INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40104WB2008PTC130530

Company & Directors' Information:- BHUSHAN INDUSTRIES LTD [Amalgamated] CIN = U45202CH1973PLC003334

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31101GA1996PTC002221

Company & Directors' Information:- A K C STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD [Active] CIN = L27109WB1957PLC023360

Company & Directors' Information:- S K P STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27310WB1997PTC085261

Company & Directors' Information:- D P ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27310DL2008PLC176856

Company & Directors' Information:- A K ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25206DL1997PTC085204

Company & Directors' Information:- A M R STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27100MH2010PTC203176

Company & Directors' Information:- G L ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28920MH1981PTC023662

Company & Directors' Information:- A R STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27104TN1995PTC030382

Company & Directors' Information:- B V M ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28111DL1972PLC005983

Company & Directors' Information:- B P STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28900MH1959PTC011426

Company & Directors' Information:- K S STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27320OR1993PTC003340

Company & Directors' Information:- A S STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U27209WB1983PTC035796

Company & Directors' Information:- S. G. POWER AND STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U14290DL2012PTC240718

Company & Directors' Information:- R. S. STEEL AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100CT2009PTC021362

Company & Directors' Information:- BHUSHAN ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP and Dissolved] CIN = U74899DL1983PTC015724

Company & Directors' Information:- KANISKA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD [Active] CIN = U27104WB1978PLC031560

Company & Directors' Information:- J B STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999MH1954PTC009352

Company & Directors' Information:- I-POWER ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U65933TN1992PTC022764

Company & Directors' Information:- A. V. ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1974PTC007360

Company & Directors' Information:- B N STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U27109WB1959PTC024368

Company & Directors' Information:- A. S. POWER ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74200UP2017PTC092118

Company & Directors' Information:- G D R ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U27109UP1971PTC003388

Company & Directors' Information:- R POWER ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40107TG2012PTC078809

Company & Directors' Information:- R M STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1981PTC011723

Company & Directors' Information:- I B I ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45202PB1974PTC003422

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER ENGINEERING CORPORATION PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51109WB1951PTC019808

Company & Directors' Information:- A H B ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U35999WB1988PTC044786

Company & Directors' Information:- O K ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1987PTC027660

Company & Directors' Information:- A N POWER ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210TN1999PTC041701

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28111WB1959PTC024156

Company & Directors' Information:- R P ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1973PTC006781

Company & Directors' Information:- S V ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Under Liquidation] CIN = U74210TG1981PTC003174

    F.M.A. No. 307 of 2012 (CAN No. 4028 of 2014)

    Decided On, 01 September 2014

    At, High Court of Judicature at Calcutta

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE

    For the Appellant: Saptanshu, Sr. Advocate, Joydeb Ghorai, Suman Chatterjee, Saugata Banerjee, Advocates. For the Respondents: Saktinath Mukherjee, Senior Advocate, Swapan Kr. Dutta, Anindya Lahiri, Sadhan Roy Chaudhury, Ayan Banerjee, Advocates.



Judgment Text

1. This mandamus appeal is directed against the judgement and/or order passed by the Learned Single Judge of this court on 20th April, 2011 in W.P. No. 5419(W) of 2005 at the instance of the appellant who was respondent No. 10 in the writ proceeding.

2. The legality of the land acquisition proceeding bearing L.A. Case No. IV-10/2003-04 initiated under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 for acquisition of 20.70 acres of land lying and situated at Mouza Bangihati P.S. Sreerampore, District- Hooghly was challenged in the writ petition filed by the owners of the said land on various grounds such as:- i) The mandatory provision of Rule 4 of the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules 1963 has not been complied with, and ii) Objection under Section 5A of the said Act was rejected by the Land Acquisition Collector mechanically without considering the objection submitted by the land owners against the proposal for acquisition of the said land before the concerned authority, etc.

3. The legality of the publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was challenged in the said writ petition. The Learned Trial Judge was pleased to allow the writ petition by quashing the land acquisition proceeding by holding that the entire land acquisition proceeding for acquiring the said land of the petitioner was vitiated due to non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Rule 4 of the said Rule.

4. The present mandamus appeal is directed against the said judgement and/or order passed by the Learned Trial Judge.

5. Objection regarding maintainability of this appeal at the instance of the requiring body is raised by Mr. Mukherjee, Learned Senior advocate appearing for the writ petitioner/respondent on the ground that the requiring body cannot be a party aggrieved against the order passed by the Learned Trial Judge, as no interest in the land in question having been created by publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, it cannot be affected by the order of quashing of the land acquisition proceeding.

6. In support of his submission, he has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of theMunicipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. Chandulal Shamaldas Patel & Ors. reported in 1971(3)SCC 821wherein it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the appeal at the instant of the requiring body cannot be maintained as the requiring body cannot be held to be a party aggrieved in case declaration under Section 6 of the said Act is quashed.

7. That apart, in view of the enactment of the subsequent Act i.e., Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and particularly in view of the provision contained in Section 24(2) of the said Act, the present appeal has practically been rendered infractuous. With the enactment of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been repealed. However, by virtue of the provision contained in Section 24(2) of the said Act, the land acquisition proceeding initiated under Act I of 1894 were saved in cases where award under Section 11 of the Act I of 1894 had been passed at least five years before the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, came into effect but possession of the acquired land has not been taken.

8. Since in the present case, the land acquisition proceeding did not proceed further after publication of the declaration under Section 6 of Act I of 1894, the impugned land acquisition has lapsed by virtue of Section 24(2) of the said Act.

9. Thus, even if we allow this appeal and set aside the judgment and/or order which is impugned in this appeal, still then no useful purpose will be served as the impugned land acquisition proceeding has lapsed and there is no possibility of completing the said land acquisition proceeding under Act I of 1894. Thus, we feel that the challenge which was raised with regard to the legality of the impugned order in this appeal has now practically become academic. As such we do not feel any necessity to decide the appeal on merit.

10. Before parting with, we may also consider the present problem from a different angle. Even assuming that the appeal is ultimately decided in favour of the appellant and the impugned order is set aside and the declaration published under Section 6 of the Act I of 1894 is held to be valid, still then there is no possibility of completing the land acquisition proceeding under Act I of 1894 in view of the provision contained in Section 11A of the said Act which provides that the proceeding will lapse in case award is not published within two years from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 6 of the said Act. In the present case, the said statutory period of two years for publication of the award has already lapsed. As such the said land acquisition proceeding cannot be completed under the said Act, even in the absence of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisiti

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

on, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 11. As such, we are of the view that the appeal has now become infructuous. We thus, dismiss the appeal. 12. In view of the dismissal of the appeal itself, no further order need be passed on the application which is deemed to be disposed of. 13. The application being CAN 4028 of 2014 is thus, deemed to be disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocate for the petitioner immediately. Appeal dismissed.
O R