Supreme Court: While considering the petition challenging the judgment of Calcutta High Court in Hindustan Motors Ltd. v. State of W.B., 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 4505, wherein the High Court had affirmed West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal’s verdict upholding resumption of 395 acres of land by West Bengal Government from Hindustan Motors; the Division Bench of B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ., did not find any need to interfere with the High Court’s reasonings, and therefore, dismissed the petition.
Background:
Hindustan Motors Corporation Ltd had entered into an agreement on 23-11-1946 with the Governor of the Province of Bengal in respect of acquisition of land for the purpose of setting up of workshop and factory. The Governor of the then Province of Bengal had proceeded to acquire 530.333 acres of land in the district of Hooghly by invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LA Act). By a Registered Instrument dated 1-10-1948, the Governor of West Bengal had transferred and conveyed 530.333 acres of land acquired under the LA Act to Hindustan Motors Corporation Ltd. In 1950 Hindustan Motors Corporation Ltd, with the consent of the Governor of West Bengal had leased 313.44 acres out of the aggregate land of 530.333 acres, for valuable consideration in favour of the writ petitioner No. 1 for a period of 999 years for the purpose of construction of workshop and factories for the assembly and manufacture of motor vehicles and establishment of allied industries and storage of goods.
Between December 2019 and March 2020 State had requested disclosure of the proposal for utilizing the 395 acres of land. By a letter in April 2022 writ petitioner no. 1 had filed a proposal with the Principal Secretary, Land and Land Reforms Department, State of West Bengal requesting for an approval to transfer 120 acres of the land out of 395 acres to one joint venture company. However, in July 2022 State of West Bengal had expressed its intention to resume the 395 acres of land. Writ petitioner No. 1 had filed a representation dated 22-6-2022 as against that. By a letter dated 25-8-2022, State had called upon the writ petitioner No. 1 to furnish project plan for the proposed EV project detailing requirement of the land and justification with regard thereto. By an order dated 9-11-2022, State had resumed 395 acres of land.
Resumption of land by the State Government was then challenged before West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal (the Tribunal), however, the Tribunal dismissed the application. Aggrieved, Hindustan Motors approached Calcutta High Court.
Calcutta High Court’s decision:
Perusing the petition, the Division Bench of Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ., had formulated the following issues:
- Are the provisions of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 (1953 Act) attracted in respect of the subject land despite the same being acquired under the LA Act?
- Is Explanation II to Section 6(3) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 ultra vires the Constitution of India?
-
Is Section 6(3) of the 1953 Act not applicable in view of the writ petitioner No. 1 being a statutory lessee in terms of Section 4B(2) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (Act of 1955)?
The High Court had held that the provisions of the Act of 1953 were attracted in respect of the subject land. The Court stated that Section 6(3) of the Act of 1953 had been interpreted to mean that, revision of the quantum of land allowed to be retained cannot be done based on subsequent events. Explanation II introduced to the 2nd proviso of Section 6(3) however, has sought to redress such defect in Section 6(3) by providing, retrospectively, that, revision of quantum of land allowed to be retained can be undertaken based on the subsequent events.
Explanation II introduced to Section 6(3) of the Act of 1953 has brought Section 6(3) of the Act of 1953 to be in tune with the declared objective of the Act of 1953, that is, it being the law relating to land tenure consequent on the vesting of all estates and certain rights therein. Power of the State to take cognizance of the subsequent events with regard to the land in question governed under the Act of 1953 has been recognised in various provision of the Act of 1953 itself as also in the Act of 1953. Explanation II is one of such provision which allow subsequent events to be taken into account. Therefore, it was further held that Explanation II to Section 6(3) of the Act of 1953 is not ultra vires the Constitution.
The Court opined that writ petitioners may or may not be direct lessee under the State in terms of Section 4B (2) of the Act of 1955, but that does not preclude the applicability of Section 6(3) of the Act of 1953 in respect of the land in question.
Therefore, the High Court dismissed Hindustan Motors’ petition against Tribunal’s order validating resumption of 395 acres of land by State of West Bengal.
Proceedings before the Supreme Court:
While considering Hindustan Motors’ challenge against the afore-stated verdict of the High Court the Supreme Court perused the facts and contentions raised by the parties vis-a-vis implication of Section 6(3) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 in the context of the proviso to Section 6(3) as well as the effect of the insertion of Explanation II to the said Section.
Having regard to the reasoning of the High Court, the Bench did not find any need to interfere in the matter and hence dismissed the petition.
[Hindustan Motors v. State of West Bengal, Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 15947/2025, decided on 16-7-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Shyam Diwan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Jhunhunwala, Adv. Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Adv. Mr. Tridib Bose, Adv. Ms. Phalguni Nigam, Adv. Mr. Debjyoti Saha, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Pandey, Adv. Mr. Divyanshu Kumar Srivastava, AOR
For Respondent(s): Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Debanjan Mandal, Adv. Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Adv. Ms. Mahima Cholera, Adv. Ms. Shraddha Chirania, Adv. Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR Dr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Abhinabh Garg, Adv. Mr. Rohan Talwar, Adv. Mr. Naman Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, Adv.
Buy Constitution of India HERE
