Judgment:
Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.
1. Both C.W.J.C. No. 6637/09 & 8806/09 are taken up together.
2. Petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 6637/09 are president and secretary of Teachers Association as well as president and secretary of non teaching staff of A.M. College, Gaya, a constituent unit of Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Bihar (in short the University) respectively. Petitioner No. 1 in C.W.J.C. No. 8806 of 2009 is the college through its principal and petitioner No. 2 is the principal of the same college by post.
3. Petitioners pray for quashing notification dated 13.11.2008 and 14.11.2008 as well as the award dated 26.2.2009 prepared under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short the Act) in land acquisition case No. 2 of 2008-09.
4. The notification dated 13.11.2008 was issued under Section 17 of the Act for acquisition of land in question, which is an emergent provision. The notification dated 14.11.2008 has been issued under Section 6 of the Act.
5. Facts of the case in short is as follows:
a) One Romendra Nath Khan donated area of 25.03 acre appertaining to C.S. Khata No. 70 situated at village Koshdihara, Tauzi No. 4100, Thana No. 330, pargana phara, Police Station Chandauti (Moffasil) in the district of Gaya vide registered deed of gift, dated 23.3.1964 in favour of the Governor of Bihar. The aforesaid land was donated for establishing of AM College. A copy of deed of gift has been annexed as annexure 1. The District collector vide letter dated 24.5.2002 sought for consent of the Principal of the College for acquiring of 13.7 acres of aforesaid land for construction of Administrative Training Sansthan. The principal of the college vide memo No. 141 of 2008 dated 30.5.2008 replied that he is not the competent authority to accord consent in this regard.
b) The Registrar of the University vide memo No. 127/EO dated 21.6.2008 submitted before the Land Acquisition Officer that land in question be kept out of proceeding, as acquisition of land of the college for construction of Administrative Training Sansthan would violate the terms of the deed of gift and purpose for which it was donated. Copy of the aforesaid letter dated 21.6.2008 of Registrar of the University is annexed as annexure 3. In spite of the objection, impugned notification under Section 17(4) was issued on 13.11.2008, followed by notification under Section 6 on 14.11.2008. It would appear from notification dated 13.11.2008 issued under Section 17(4) of the Act, that persons interested in the land could file their objections. It is not very clear whether the petitioner filed objections or not within the time schedule. Consequently an award under Section 11 of the Act was prepared on 26.2.2009.
6. Petitioners have challenged the impugned proceeding on the premises that land acquisition proceeding would not be maintainable against land of College or University as it is a Government land. He contends that land acquisition proceeding cannot be initiated against Government land. The land was specifically donated for the purpose of establishing A.M. College, so it cannot be used for any other purpose. Moreover, there is provision for gradation of colleges on the basis of infrastructure. A college having vast campus is entitled to better gradation and thus can receive better funding as well as more academic courses from the UGC.
7. In support of his contention that Government land cannot be acquired under Land Acquisition Act, he relies upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, in case of Sharda Devi v. State of Bihar and Anr. reported in : (2003) 3 SCC 128 para 27. It may be useful to quote relevant extracts of the judgment contained:
The State does not acquire its own land for it is futile to exercise the power of eminent domain for acquiring rights in the land, which already vests in the State. It would be absurdity to comprehend the provisions of the land Acquisition Act being applicable to such land wherein the ownership or the entirety of rights already vests in the State. In other words, the land owned by the State on which there are no private rights or encumbrances is beyond the purview of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The position of law is so clear as does not stand in need of any authority for support. Still a few decided cases in point may be referred since available.
8. He further submits that one public purpose cannot over ride the other public purpose as the land has been donated for a public purpose itself.
9. The State in its counter affidavit has stated that A.M. College, Gaya has been established in the heart of the town in the area of 20.25 acres and the donated land is about 5 kilometers away from the A.M. College, which has remained unutilized for over 40 years. Thus the State counsel contends that the land under acquisition is of no use to the college. He submits that though land has been registered in the name of Governor, but presently it is running in the name of University/College, in view of decree of Sub Judge-II, Gaya in Title suit No. 41 of 1982.
10. It would be relevant to point out that the Vice Chancellor through the Registrar of the University filed a title suit in the year 1982 for declaration of its title in respect of aforesaid suit land having an area of 25 acres 3 decimals on different plots of khata No. 30 of village as noticed above. The Civil Court by judgment dated 11.7.1984 decreed the suit declaring title of the plaintiff (Vice Chancellor of the University) through its Registrar over the aforesaid suit land. According to the State, Zamabandi is running in name of college and thus the land in question is a 'rayati land' and land acquisition proceeding is fully maintainable.
11. Heard the parties.
12. There could not be any need for Government to initiate land acquisition proceeding in respect of its Aam land or land which stands recorded in its name. A land which stands in the name of Government can be transferred from one of its department to another or to a local body or company according to procedure laid down in Chapter 8 of the Bihar Government State and Manual, 1941. Furthermore, there would no need for Government to acquire it own land as the same belongs to it. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Sharda Devi (supra) has observed that it is futile for State to exercise the power of eminent domain for acquiring land which already vests in State.
13. I am not in agreement with the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner that the land which is running in record of right or revenue record as land of University or college is a Government land.
14. The title of the land has been declared in favour of the University by virtue of decree of civil court in Title suit No. 41 of 1982 of sub-judge, Gaya. As such, ownership of land does not stand in name of Government. A college or a University is a legal entity and not a form of Government. The University or college is a statutory body established under the State Universities Act under Section 3 and 4(10) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976. It is an authority under the Universities Acts. The property or land possessed by it cannot be deemed to be Government property or land. It is an independent and autonomous entity which can sue or be sued. The Apex Court in Sharda Devi case held that there is no need for Government to a acquire its own land. The land in dispute is not a Government land, as it is property of University or college.
15. Thus, the decision of Apex Court would not be applicable in facts of this case. The land recorded in name of the university is its raiyati land. Though land acquisition proceeding is not maintainable against Government land, but it is fully maintainable against raiyati land of an individual or a statutory body which is not Governmental itself. Thus the contention of petitioner that land in question is a Government land and land acquisition proceeding is not maintainable, are both devoid of merit and rejected.
16. The petitioners have filed objection on 14.3.2009 before the Land Acquisition Officer contained in annexure 10 of C.W.J.C. No. 8806/09. Furthermore as soon as they came to learn about the notification dated 13.11.2008 they filed a petition on 15.12.2008 as well as on 14.3.2009.
17. It will be open to the petitioners to take remedial measures either under Section 15A of the Act before the Government or by way of pressing its application dated 14.3.2009 before the Land Acquisition Officer.
18. In case, such a representation is filed before the Government under Section 15A of the Act, the same would be disposed of in accordance with law.