Holding

The requisition and subsequent acquisition were valid; the notice was properly served, the Collector applied his mind, and the purpose was a public purpose.

Summary

The West Bengal Housing Board sought to acquire 0.63 acres of land belonging to Brijendra Lal Mundhra for a housing project for weaker sections, which included an approach road, market complex, clinic and drainage. The land was requisitioned under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, and notice was served by affixing it on the land and the Collector's office as prescribed by Rule 3(d). The petitioners challenged the requisition, alleging that notice was not served before possession was taken, that the Collector did not apply his mind, and that the purpose was not a public purpose. The Calcutta High Court held the notice was defective and set aside the requisition. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the notice complied with Section 3(2) and Rule 3(d), the Collector had applied his mind, and the purpose—construction of essential infrastructure for a housing scheme for weaker sections—constituted a public purpose under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. Consequently, the requisition and subsequent acquisition were upheld and the writ petition dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the notice under Section 3(2) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 was validly served as per Rule 3(d).
Whether the Collector exercised sufficient application of mind in issuing the requisition order.
Whether the purpose of the requisition—construction of an approach road, market complex, clinic and drainage as part of a housing project for weaker sections—qualifies as a public purpose under the Act.
Whether the subsequent acquisition of the land under Section 4 of the Act is valid.

Legislation cited

Subjects

land acquisitionrequisitionpublic purposenotice servicehousing projectWest Bengalapproach roadmarket complexcompensation

Judgment

A WEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD
v.
BRA WAN LAL MUNDHRA AND ORS .

. JULY 9, 1997

B (K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.)

Land Acquisition :

West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948-Sections
C 3 & 4-West Bengal (Requisition and Acquisition) Rules-Rule 3-Requisi-
tion of land-Notice found to have been duly served by means of affIXation
as required under Section 3(2) read with Rule 3(d) before taking over posses-
sio1t--Held, Notice was properly served.

Land.Acquisition Act, 1894-Section 4--l'ublic purpose-Requisition
D of land for the purpose of constntction of houses for weaker sections of society
or for constmction of approach road in the housing project, provision for
market place, doctor's clinic, drainage etc.-Held, cannot be said that the land
was not requisitioned and subsequently acquired for the public purpose.

E Appellant State wanted to acquire lands belonging to the respon-
dents for which notice requiring the lands were served by the process
•·
server by means of affixation. Subsequently the land was acquired by the
State, but the order was quashed by the High Court on the ground that
there was no proper service of notice. However, status quo was maintained.
...
As per the order of the High Court, fresh notice was served on the
F respondents which was again challenged before the High Court on three
grounds, namely, (i) that no notice was served prior to taking over posses·
sion of the land; (ii) that there was total non-application of mind on the
part of the Collector in issuing the requisitioning notice and (iii) that the
purpose was not a public purpose. The Single Judge of the High Court
G allowed the Writ Petition of the respondents. It was confirmed by the
Division Bench. Allowing the appeal, this Court

HELD : 1. This Court is unable to concur with the view taken by the
High Court that notice had not been properly served or that there was no
application of mind on the part of the Collector in requisitioning the land
H or that the purpose for which the requisition was made was not a public
172
WESTBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L.MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.) 173

purpose. Construction of approach road in the housing project, provision A
for market complex, doctor's clinic, drainage etc., form part of the housing
project and cannot be considered in isolation. That is the public purpose
for which the land in question had been requisitioned, a purpose which is
a public purpose. (182-G-H; 183-A-B]

West Bengal Housing Board etc. v~ Brijendra Prasad Gupta & Ors., B
[1997] Suppl. 2 SCR, decided on July 9, 1997, referred to.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4388 of
1997

From the Judgment and Order dated 7.6.96 of the Calcutta High C
Court in F.M.A.T. No. 1507 of 1994.

V.R. Reddy, Additional Solicitor General, D.P. Gupta, T.C. Ray, Dr.
Shankar Ghose, N.K. Poddar, Rajesh Srivastava, Ujjwal Banerjee, P. Basu,
H.K. Puri, M.C. Dhingra, Ms. Laxtni Arvind, Sanjay Bansal, G.K. Bansal, D
Arvind Kumar, Ms. Radha Rangaswamy and Ms. Zoya Radke for the
appearing parties.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

D.P. WADHWA, J. Special leave granted. E
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated June 7, 1996 of a
Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, which Judgment was passed in
appeal against the judgment dated April 18, 1994 of the learned Single
Judge allowing the writ petition of the first respondent. This was however
the second round of litigation between the parties. F
The first respondent who was the petitioner sought quashing of the
earlier order dated December 21, 1981 passed by the Collector and Addi-
tional District Magistrate, Hooghly under Section 3(1) of the West Bengal
Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (for short the Act) requisi- G
tioning 0.63 acres of land of the petitioner bearing plot No. 1790, Mouza
Monoharpur, J.L. No. 98 in the district of Hooghly. In terms of this order
the possession of the land was taken over on January 7, 1982. As a matter
of fact the order of requisition pertained to 21.41 acres of land of various
plot numbers which included the plot of the petitioner. The report of the
process server shows that the notice requisitioning the land was served by H
174 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A means of affixation with seal and the signatures of witnesses, by going to
the places mentioned in the order requisitioning the land. The petitioner
filed the writ petition in the Calcutta High Court challenging the order of
requisition dated December 21, 1981 on the ground that possession of the
land was taken over without the service of the order on him which was the
B mandatory requirement of law. By judgment dated February 23, 1983, the
learned Judge of the High Court disposed of the writ petition with the
following orrler :

"In this writ petition one of the grievances of the writ petitioner is
that though he is the owner of the plot in question, the respondents
c are trying to take possession of those lands in purported exercise
of their powers under Section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land
(Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 without serving him with
a notice of requisition or acquisition. In controverting the above
contention of the petitioner the respondents assert that the notice
has duly been served upon the recorded owner and as the
D petitioner was not the recorded owner he was not served with any
notice. It, however, appears that by a registered deal dated Novem-
ber 9, 1965 the petitioner purchased the plot in question from the
recorded owner and as such the petitioner is entitled to a statutory
notice under the Act. In such circumstances I direct the respon-
E dents to serve a copy of the notice of requisition upon the
petitioner and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. Let
status quo in respect of the plot in question be maintained till such
service of notice. Let it be recorded that I have not decided any
of the other points raised by the parties in support of their
respective contentions. Let it also be recorded that such service of
F
notice \vill not ipso facto give any right to the petitioner to claim
any compensation if the land is subsequently acquired."

Since the court directed maintenance of _status quo possession of the land
remained with the State.
G
The order of requisitioning was again served on the petitioner by the
order dated February 23, 1983 and said to have been received by the
petitioner on March 24, 1983. On April 5, 1983 the petitioner again filed
another writ petition (C.R. No. 3210 (W) of 1983) in the Calcutta High
H Court challenging the order of requisition on three grounds, namely that
WESfBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L.MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.] 175

(i) no notice was served prior to taking over the possession of the land in A
question, (ii) that there was a total non application of mind on the part of
the Collector in issuing the requisitioning notice and (iii) the purpose for
which the requisition was made was not a public purpose. Thi~ wfit petition
was disposed of by the judgment dated April 18, 1994 of the learned Single
Judge, as noted above, holding that no notice was served on the petitioner B
before taking over the possession of the land in question and that there
was no application of mind on the part of the Collector in issuing the order
requisitioning the land and that the purpose for which the requisition was
made was not a public purpose.

In the meanwhile, however, by gazette notification dated June 6, 1985 C
published on June 12, 1985 in the Calcutta gazette extraordinary issued
under Section 4 of the Act the State Government acquired all the lands
including that of the petitioner which was subject matter of requisition. The
appellant West Bengal Housing Board filed an appeal before the Division
Bench of the Calcutta High Court against the judgment dated April 18,
1994 of the learned Single Judge. This appeal was dismissed by the im- D
pugned judgment dated June 7, 1996 on the limited ground that the order
requisitioning the land was not served upon the petitioner before taking
over the possession which was mandatory required under Section 3 of the
Act. It would appear the Division Bench did not consider other two
grounds on which writ petition had been allowed by the learned Single E
Judge.

We may at this stage set out the relevant provisions of law and the
operative portion of the orders requisitioning and then acquiring the land.

Section 3 of the Act reads as under : F

"Power to requisition : (1) If the State Government is of the
opinion that it is necessary so to do for maintaining supplies and
services essential to the life of the community (or for increasing
employment opportunities for the people by establishing commer-
cial estates and industrial estates in different areas) or for provid- G
ing proper facilities for transport, communication, irrigation or
drainage, or for the creation of better living conditions in rural or
urban areas, not being an industrial or other areas excluded by the
State Government by a notification in this behalf, by the construc-
tion or re-construction or dwelling places in such areas (or for H
176 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A purposes connected therewith or incidental thereto), the State
Government may, by order in writing, requisition any land and may
make such further orders as appear to it to be n~cessary or
'expedient in connection with the requisitioning:

Provided that no land used for purpose of religious worship
B or used by an educational or charitable institution shall be
requisitioned under this section.

(lA) A Collector of a. District, (an Additional District
Magistrate or the First Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta) when
c authorised by the State Government in this behalf, may exercise
within his jurisdiction the powers conferred by sub- section (1).

(2) An order under sub-section (1) shall be served in the
prescribed manner on the owner of the land and where the order
relates to land in occupation (of an occupier, not being the owner
D of the land, also on such occupier).

(3) If any person fails to comply with an order made under
sub-section (1) the Collector or any person authorised by him in
writing in this behalf shall execute the order in such manner as he
considers expedient and may.-
E
(a) if he is a Magistrate, enforce the delivery of possession of
the land in respect of which the order has been made to himself,
or

F (b) if he is not a Magistrate, apply to a Magistrate or, in
Calcutta as defined in clause (11) of Section 5 of the C~lcutta
Municipal Act 1951, to the Commissioner of Police, and such
Magistrate or Commissioner, as the case may be, shall enforce the
delivery of possession of such land to him."
G Section 4 of the Act reads as under :

"4. Acquisition of land - (1) Where any land has been requisitioned
under Section 3, the State Government may use or deal with such
land for any of the purposes preferred to in sub-section (1) of
H Section 3 as may appear to it to be expedient.
WESTBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L.MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.) 177

-· (la) The State Government may acquire any land requisitioned
under Section 3 by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette that
A

such land· is required for a public purpose referred to in sub-sec-
tion (1) of Section 3. ·

(2) Where a notice as aforesaid is published in the Official
Gazette, the requisitioned land shall, on and from the beginning B
of the day on which the notice is so published, vest absolutely in
the (State) Government free from all incumbrances and the period
of requisition of such land shall end."
,,
Rule~ of the West Bengal Land (Requisition & Acquisition) Rules, 1948 C
deals with manner of service of orders and is as under :

"3. Manner of Service of Orders - An order under sub-section
(1) of section 3 shall be served on the owner of the land and where
the order relates to land in occupation of. an occupier not being
the owner of the land, also on such occupier, D
(a) by delivering or tendering a copy thereof, endorsed either
by the person authorised by the Act to make the order or by the
Collector, to the person on whom the order is to be served or his
agent, or
E
(b) by fixing a copy thereof on the outer door of some con-
spicuous part of the house in which the person on whom the order
is to be served ordinarily resides or carries on business or per-
sonally works for gain, or
F
(c) by sending the same to the person on whom the order is to
be served by registered post with acknowledgement due, or

(d) by fixing a copy thereof in some conspicuous part of the
land to which the order relittes and also in some conspicuous place
of the office of the Collector." G
Extract of order under Section 3 ·of the Act :

"Whereas in my opinion it is necessary for the purpose of
maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the com-
munity/providing proper facilities for transport/communication/ir- H
178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A rigation/drainage viz. for implementation of the housing project at ·
Monoharpur to requisition the land(s) described in the schedule
below/overleaf.

And whereas State Government has by notification No. 20500
LA dated 3.12.63 published in the Calcutta Gazette Part I of the
B 26th December, 1963, at page 2578 authorised me to exercise the
power conferred by sub-section (lA) of Section 3 of the West
Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (West Ben-
gal Act II of 1948).

Now therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by sub:sec-
c tion (lA) of Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and
Acquisition) Act, 1948 West Bengal Act I.I of 1948 read with the
authority so vested in me as aforesaid, I do hereby requisition the
land's mentioned in the schedule below overleaf and make the
· following further order namely :
D
(1) that possession of the land will be taken on 7.1.82 at 1 p.m.
and

(2) that the owner/occupier/tenant of the said land shall furnish
me such information relating to said land as will be necessary from
E time to time."

Extract from the gazette notification under Section 4 of the Act :

"HOOGHLY No. 3528 L.A. (II) 4H·l/81 - 6th June, 1985 -
Whereas 8.2216 hectares (20.34 acres), more or less, of land situate
F ·in the village of Monoharpur, described below, have been requi-
sitioned under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the West Bengal
(Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, by the person authorised
under Section 3(1A) of the said Act for the public purpose of
creating better living condition in urban or rural areas by construc-
tion and reconstruction of dwelling places in such area or for
G
purpose connected therewith and incidental thereto, viz. for im-
plementation of housing project;

Now, therefore, notice is hereby given that in pursuance of
section 4 of the said Act the Governor acquires such land being
H required for a public purpose as aforesaid.
WESTBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L.MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.) 179

This notice is given under the provisions of sub- section (lA) A
of Section 4 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisi-
tion) Act. 1948 (West Bengal Act II of 1948), to all whom it may
concern.

A plan of the land may be inspected in the office of the B
Collector, Hooghly."·

It would appear that neither the State Government nor the Collector
and Additional District Magistrate,, Hooghly appeared before the High
Court. The writ petition. was defended by the · appellant West Bengal
Housing Board and on this ground, a presumption was sought to be raised C
that there was no application of mind by the parties in requisitioning the
land and that notice had not been properly served in accordance with Rule
3 before taking over possession of the land ..

West Bengal Housing Board has been constituted under the West D
Bengal Housing Board Act, 1972. It is a body corporate having perpetual
succession and a common seal and may sue and be sued in its corporate
name and shall be competent to acquire and hold property both movable
and immovable, enter into contract and do all things necessary for the
purposes of the Act. This Housing Board .Act provides as to how the
Housing Board is to be constituted, prescribes power and duties of the E
Housing Board and appointment of all its staff incluciing the Housing
Commissioner. etc. Under Section 17 of the Housing Board Act, the
Housing Board exercises powers; subject to the provisions of that Act. It
may incur .expenditure and undertake works for the framing and execution
of such housing schemes as it may consider necessary and such housing F
schemes may include housing schemes in relation to lands and buildings
vested in or in the possession of the State Government. The State Govern-
ment may also entrust the Housing Board the framing and execution of any
housing scheme, whether provided for by the Act or not, and the Housing
Board shall thereupon undertake the framing and execution .of such
schemes and on such terms and conditions the State Government may think G
fit to impose. Section 18 of the Housing Board Act provides matters to be
taken into consideration for the housing schemes. Under Section 29 of the
Housing Board Act, the State Governmeµt may transfer .to the Housing
Board on such terms.and conditions as may be prescribed·such assets and
liabilities of the State Government and thereupon these stand vested and H
180 . SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) SUJ>P. 2 S.C.R.

A transferred to the Housing Board. It is not necessary for us to state the
various provisions of the Housing Board Act except to say that the Housing ·
Board it is a statutory body with the Minister incharge of the housing
department ·of the State Government as the Chairman of the Housing
Board.

B It is not disputed that the land in question was transferred to the
Housing Board, the appellant herein, by the State Government for
execution and completion of the housing scheme known as "Dankuni", in
Monza Monoharpur in the State of West Bengal. The Housing Board
contested the writ petition. It submitted that it was possessed of all the
{
C records of the State Government as well as of the Collector and Additional
District Magistrate, Hooghly which were produced in court during the
course of hearing. In this view of the matter the appearance of the State
Government or the Collector-cum-Additi_onal District Magistrate,
Hooghly, need not have been insisted upon and no adverse presumption
D could have been raised. Be that as it may when the present special leave
petition was filed liberty was granted to State Government to file its
counter. In pursuant to that an affidavit was filed by the Land Acquisition
Officer under the Collector, Hooghly. This affidavit has been filed on the
basis of the official record. It has been mentioned that on January 4, 1982
E the order requisitioning the land was duly served under Section 3(2) of the
Act upon all the owners/occupiers of the land as per the Records of Right
available with the Collector by affixing a copy thereof on the conspicuous
part of the land and the Collector's office in terms of Rule 3(d) of the
Rules. It is stated, it was only after due service of notice under Section 3(2)
of the Act read :vith Rule 3(d) <if the Rules that possession of the land was
F taken. It has also been stated thaHt was wr.ongly alleged on the part of the
petitioner that neither the State nor the Collector filed any affidavit before
the High Court and that Mr. Tapas Kumar Cliakraborty, Collector,
Hooghly duly swore an affidavit on October 23, 1993 on behalf of the State
Government and Collector, Hooghly. The affidavit of the Land Acquisition
G Officer further states as under :

1. The appeal was filed by the West Bengal Housing Board as it was
the principal aggrieved party as by that time a part of the ho~sing project
had been completed and the land was requir\:d for the purpose of provid-
H ing the residents with an approach road to the nearby national highway.
WESfBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L.MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.) 181

2 The land was essentially required for the purpose of setting up a A
market complex and for providing an access road to more than 5000
residents of the Dankuni Housing Project. In fact, the only road leading to
the national highway passes through this plot of land. This is an existing
road and people are using this only road since the inception of the project.
If the road is now closed, the project will be a land-locked one and the B
residents will have no access to and from the project.

3. Providing housing facilities in order to create better living condi-
tions for the people is a public purpose of great importance and there was .
sufficient material before the requisitioning authoritY to form an opinion
under the Act. The requisition was done by the Collector on behalf of the C
State Government and all the necessary papers were available with the
court. West Bengal Housing Board did not construct "Dankuni" Housing
Project with the motive of making higher profit. By constructing the said
project in a predominantly rural area, housing board was only fulfilling its
obligation under the Act towards creating better living conditions for the D
people.

The Dankuni Project has not yet been fully completed. Only the
residential flats have been constructed. The approach road and the market
complex have to be provided to satisfy the essential requirements of more
than 5000 residents of the housing complex. E

A further look at Dankuni Housing Project may also be relevant. It
is stated that "Dankuni" is about 30 kms. away from the city of Calcutta
and is well connected with road and railway with the city of Calcutta. It is
within the purview of both urban and rural areas. The West Bengal F
Housing Board took up the implementation of housing project in the urban
and rural areas of the State of West Bengal and the Housing Board
intended to implement housing complex in Dankuni at Manza Monoharpur
by constructing about 1100 dwelling units for weaker section of the com-
munity including a market complex, doctor's clinic, road, drainage etc. to
cater to the needs of about 6000 inhabitants living in the project. The State G
Government granted approvai to the Dankuni housing project and accord-
ingly it was decided to acquire land measuring 21.41 acres including the .
land subject matter of these proceedings. It is further submitted that from
1983 to 1994 during the pendency of the writ petition in the High Court
construction work started in phases. These was different categories of flats H
182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A viz., Higher Income Group (Upper), High Income Group (Lower), Middle
Income Group and the lower income group. Flats which are earnmarked '-
for the income group of below Rs. 72,00 per annum cost Rs. 20,000 each
flat; flats earmarked for the income group of Rs. 7200 to Rs. 18,000 per
annum cost Rs. 60,000 flats for the income group of Rs. 18,000 and above
per annum cost Rs. 93,000 and flats for the income group of Rs. 30,000 per
B annum to cost Rs. 1,80,000. Wide publicity had been given inviting applica-
tions from public for allotment of flats and it is stated that 1000 flats had
already constructed and possession taken over by the allottees who are
living there.

C When the learned single Judge decided the first writ petition he had
directed maintenance of status quo till service of notice requisitioning the
land. Thereafter notice requisitioning the land was served upon the
petitioner. Nothing further was to be done as far as the State authorities
were concerned as the possession of the land had earlier been taken though
D the learned Judge had directed serving a copy of the notice of the requi-
sitioning order upon the petitioner and thereafter to proceed in accordance
with law. As a matter of fact what we find is that service of the notice for
requisition of the land had already been earlier served on the petitioner as
required under Section 3(2) of the Act read with Rule 3(d) of the Rules.
This land was subsequently acquired under Section 4 of the Act. From the
E record it could not be said that the land was not requisitioned and
subsequently acquired for any public purpose. Public purpose of construc-
tion of houses for weaker section is very much there. We fail to see if in
the context of construction of houses for weaker sections of society it can
be said that public purpose stand frustrated. Further, the Housing Board
F is not always enjoined to construct houses for a particular section of
society. It is a matter of common knowledge that there is an acute shortage
of houses and to meet that end the H<msing Boards in States have been
constituted.

We have examined impugned order requisitioning the land and also
G the gazette notification acquiring the land and we are unable to concur
with the view taken by the High Court that notice had not been properly
served or that there was no application of mind on the part of the Collector
in requisitioning the land or that the purpose for which the requisition was
made was not a public purpose. Construction of approach road in the
H housing project, provision for market complex, doctor's clinic. drainage etc.
WESTBENGALHOUSINGBOARD v. B.L,MUNDHRA[D.P.WADHWA,J.J 183

form part of the housing project and cannot be considered in isolation. A
That is the public purpose for which the land in question had been
requisitioned, a purpose which is a public purpose. We may also usefully
refer to the judgment delivered by us today in batch of appeals arising out
of SLP (C) Nos. 12914/96 etc. etc. entitled West Bengal Housing Board Etc.
v. Brijendra Prasad Gupta & Ors. Etc.
B
The appeal is accordingly allowed, the judgments of the learned
single judge and that of the Division Bench in appeal are set aside and the
writ petition filed by the first respondent is dismissed. There will be no
order as to costs.

R.K.S. Appeal allowed.