Sharif Patel v. State of M. P. — 1993 DIGILAW 456 (MP)

JUDGMENT General above ten lakhs For projects above twenty five lakhs and in all cases where awards have been passed by the Collector as the land Acquisition Officer. The notification reproduced above does not use the words 'supersede', 'revoke', 'cancel' and the like. The underlined portion would show that powers delegated by the notification are subject to instructions issued from time to time by the State Government in this regard. Having regard to this expression used in the notification the order dated 24.12.83 would be saved and would not be superseded or cancelled by notification dated 16.11.90. Notification dated 16.11.90 is only supplementary to the other instructions of the State Government on the subject and does not have the effect of wiping out order dated 24.12.83 Annexure P/1 to the petition. According to order dated 24.12.83 the Collector can inter alia exercise powers under Ss. 4, 5, 6 & 17 of the Act only with respect to those projects or. Though several contentions have ,been urged by Shri Mathur, the petition can be decided on the short ground of jurisdiction of the Collector District Ujjain to exercise powers of an appropriate Government under Ss. 4, 6 and 17 of the Act to issue notification and orders. While according to Shri A.M. Mathur under M.P. Government Revenue Department Order dated 24.12.83 delegated powers under Ss. 4, 5, 6 & 17 of the Act can be exercised by the Collector only if the project or scheme is approved by the Government or on request of a department of the State Government according to respondents 1 and 2 exercise of powers by the Collector is defended on the strength of notification No. F. 12-84- VII-9-90 dated 16.11.90 published in M.P. Government Gazette dated 30.11.90 Ann. R-2 (of respondents 1 and 2) ~ the return. What has to be seen is whether notification dated 16.11.90 has the effect of superseding revoking or wiping out the order dated 24.12.83 Ann. P/1 to the petition. R-2 (of respondents 1 and 2) ~ the return. What has to be seen is whether notification dated 16.11.90 has the effect of superseding revoking or wiping out the order dated 24.12.83 Ann. P/1 to the petition. For appreciating this issue, the relevant notification is reproduced below:- "No. F. 12-84- VII-9-90 persuant to the authority vested in me as per item (1) of instruction no, 2-A of the Supplementary instructions under Rule 13 in Party of the M.P. Government Rules of business made by the Governor of M.P. in exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (2) and (3) of Article 166 of the Constitution of India, I, L1xmi Narayan Gupta, Minister in charge Revenue Department, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh hereby direct and authorise the following officers upto the extent of monetary limits of the land acquisition awards shown against their designations, to exercise the powers under S. 11 of the L1nd Acquisition Act 1894 delegated to the State Government and to dispose of cases concerning land acquisition by using powers under sections 4, 5, 6 and 17 of the said Act subject to the instructions issued from time to time by the State Government ill this regard: 1. The Collector of the Distt. for projects upto as ex-officio Dy. Secretary twenty five lakhs. to the Govt. of M.P. in Revenue Department. 2. The Commissioner of the General above ten lakhs. Division as ex-officio For projects above twenty Secretary to the Govt. of five lakhs and in all cases M.P. in Revenue Deptt. where awards have been passed by the Collector as the land Acquisition Officer The notification reproduced above not use the words 'supersede', 'revoke', 'cancel' and the like. The understand portion would how that powers delegated by the notification are subject of instructions issued form time to time by the State Government in this regard. Having regarded to this expression used in the notification the order dated 24.12.83 would be saved and would not be superseded or cancelled by notification dated 16.11.90. Notification dated 16.11.90 is only supplementary to the other instructions of the State Government on the subject and does not have the effect of wiping out order dated 24.12.83 Annexure P/1 to the petition. According to order dated 24.12.83 the Collector can inter alia exercise powers under Ss. Notification dated 16.11.90 is only supplementary to the other instructions of the State Government on the subject and does not have the effect of wiping out order dated 24.12.83 Annexure P/1 to the petition. According to order dated 24.12.83 the Collector can inter alia exercise powers under Ss. 4, 5, 6 & 17 of the Act only with respect to those projects or schemes which were approved by the Government or/are on a request of the Department of the Government. The relevant portion of the memo order is reproduced below:- dysDVj mUgh ifj;kstukvksa vFkok ;kstuk tks fd "kklu }kjk vuqeksfnr gks ;k fdlh "kkldh; foHkkx ds fuosnu ij gh izR;kofrZr vf/kdkjksa dk iz;ksx djsaxsA In the instant case there is nothing to show that projects or schemes were approved by the Govt. The whole action has proceeded on a resolution passed by Administrator of Gram Panchayat. The exercise of powers by the Collector under Ss. 4, 6 and 17 of the Act would appear to fall outside his jurisdiction in terms of memo order dated 24.12.83 delegating powers to the Collector. As already observed notification dated 16.11.90 is only supplementary to this order and has not the effect of superseding or revoking the same. Petition allowed.