https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173135 The Adviser to the Administrator was held not competent to approve acquisition proceedings or record satisfaction for a declaration under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, because the power had been specifically entrusted to the Administrator and could not be displaced by later general delegation. The objections under Section 5A were also not duly considered: the reports were mechanical, contained no real appraisal of objections, and the departmental approval showed no independent application of mind. As a result, the statutory satisfaction required for a Section 6 declaration was absent, and the conclusive-effect clause could not cure non-compliance with the mandatory safeguards. The acquisition notifications were quashed. en-us Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173135 The Adviser to the Administrator was held not competent to approve acquisition proceedings or record satisfaction for a declaration under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, because the power had been specifically entrusted to the Administrator and could not be displaced by later general delegation. The objections under Section 5A were also not duly considered: the reports were mechanical, contained no real appraisal of objections, and the departmental approval showed no independent application of mind. As a result, the statutory satisfaction required for a Section 6 declaration was absent, and the conclusive-effect clause could not cure non-compliance with the mandatory safeguards. The acquisition notifications were quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173135