Supreme Court lays down seven procedural duties government has to follow for land acquisition

The Supreme Court on Thursday outlined the procedural guidelines to be adhered to by the government or its instrumentalities while acquiring land and depriving a citizen of his right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution [Kolkata Municipal Corporation and anr vs Bimal Kumar Shah and ors]..A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar made it clear that acquisition of land without following the due procedure would be outside the authority of law.It then explained that the following procedural rights are conferred on a landowner by Article 300A: i) Duty of the State to inform the person that it intends to acquire his property – the right to notice; ii) Duty of the State to hear the objections to the acquisition – the right to be heard; iii) Duty of the State to inform the person of its decision to acquisition – the right to a reasoned decision;iv) Duty of the State to demonstrate that the acquisition is for public purpose – acquisition only for public purpose; v) Duty of the State to restitute and rehabilitate – the right to fair compensation; vi) Duty of the State to conduct the process of acquisition efficiently and within prescribed timelines of the proceedings – the right to an efficient conduct;vii) Final conclusion of the proceedings leading to vesting – the right of conclusion.The Bench explained that the seven principles may be procedural, but they are integral to the authority of law enabling compulsory acquisition of private property, and have now become part of our administrative law jurisprudence..The observations came while dismissing appeals against a Calcutta High Court decision in a land acquisition case involving the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.The High Court, among other things, held that a valid power of acquisition with fair compensation by itself would not complete and exhaust the power and process of acquisition. It had set aside the acquisition of land by the civic body under Section 352 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act."Prescription of the necessary procedures before depriving a person of his property is an integral part of the ‘authority of law’, under Article 300A and Section 352 (of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act) contemplates no procedure whatsoever," the top court noted in appeal..The Supreme Court eventually imposed a cost of ₹5 lakh on the corporation, to be paid to the respondent-landowner..Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta appeared for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Huzefa Ahmadi and advocate Ranjeeta Rohatgi appeared for the State of West Bengal and landowners..[Read Judgment]