Land acquisition reference: development corporation acting as State agent was not a necessary or proper party.

The statutory scheme treated the development corporation engaged in new town work as an agent of the State Government, not as the acquiring body. Government resolutions showed that compensation and enhancement liabilities were to be borne by the State, while the corporation was authorised only to represent the State in the land acquisition reference. Section 50 of the Land Acquisition Act permitted participation by the authority bearing acquisition expenses, but the financial burden remained with the State. On that basis, the corporation was not a necessary or proper party to the reference, and the impleadment order was correctly set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether CIDCO was a necessary or proper party in the land acquisition reference for the New Mumbai project.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under section 113(3A) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 treats the corporation/company undertaking the new town development work as an agent of the State Government. The Government resolutions showed that the compensation and enhancement were to be borne on account of the Government, while CIDCO was only authorised to represent the State in the reference proceedings. Section 50 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 permits appearance and evidence by the authority bearing the acquisition expenses, but on the facts the financial burden remained with the State. CIDCO had also taken the position in other proceedings that it functioned as the State's agent, which supported the conclusion that it was not the acquiring body.

Conclusion: CIDCO was not a necessary or proper party to the reference, and the order impleading it was correctly set aside.

---