Chief Justice of India to look into SC's 2014 land acquisition judgement

In order to stamp out any trouble brewing in the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra indicated that on Wednesday, a five-judge bench led by him would look into an issue where a three-judge apex court bench overruled a 2014 judgement pronounced by a bench of equal strength.

Indicating the seriousness of the issue and perhaps the urgency to control controversy, the matter involving a judgment in a land acquisitions case will be taken up before the on going Aadhaar matter that has dogged the court since February.

A five-judge constitution bench also comprising Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan — the same bench hearing the Aadhar matter, will deliberate on this issue.

The matter came to a head when two benches of equal strength at the Supreme Court arrived at conflicting conclusions in a land acquisition matter, leading it to be referred to the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, seeking directions to be listed before an appropriate bench.

The dissent among the two benches bodes fresh trouble for the top court since issues of judicial indiscipline and propriety have taken root in the observations.

The matter pertains to an order passed on February 8 by a bench in a 2:1 majority, comprising Justices Arun Mishra, AK Goel and MM Shantanagoudar that held a 2014 judgement involving land acquisition, delivered by Justices RM Lodha, Madan Lokur and Kurian Joseph, as invalid.

In 2014, the apex court had ruled that landowners would receive higher compensation if the requisite amount acquired under the 1894 Act was retained in the treasury and not disbursed to the landowner or deposited with a competent court.

Usually, only a larger bench can overrule a judgment passed by a bench. In this case, only a bench comprising of four or more judges could contradict the 2014 judgement.

The February 8 judgment was favourable to the State, as opposed to the 2014 judgement which greatly benefited landowners. Here, Justice Mishra led bench held that land acquisition would not lapse even if landowners did not receive their compensation or if the required amount was deposited in the Court concerned.

However, on February 22, a bench comprising Justices Madan Lokur, Kurian Joseph - they were also part of the original bench in 2014, along with Deepak Gupta made strong remarks and observations when a land acquisition matter with a similar grievance came before them.

Justice Joseph did not hold back his displeasure when he observed "I don't want to remain silent on this issue. There are certain virgin principles which cannot be deviated from. The system exists on these holy principles. This Court should function as one institution."

He added that the interest of the institution required that the Supreme Court should act like one and not 14 different courts (courtrooms).

The bench had then refrained high courts from adjudicating on matters of land acquisition affecting a virtual stay on the relevant section of the said act. Justice Lokur had even wondered whether the issue should be referred to a larger Bench.

The obvious differences among the judges bring forth the January 8 press conference by four senior judges of the top court where they alluded that all was not well within the corridors of the top court and where they blamed Chief Justice Dipak Misra of tinkering with a well-oiled mechanism.