Report No. 10
x33. Requisitioning.-
We have adopted the Central Act as the basis for consolidation, and very few changes of a radical nature have been made in the scheme of the Act. We have tried to bring about uniformity by consolidating the provisions of the various Acts. Unnecessary provisions of the State Acts have been omitted. The main alteration which we have made is that, instead of constituting separate tribunals for determining compensation for the requisitioned property, a reference to the court as under the Land Acquisition Act has been substituted. Under the existing law, the tribunal has to be presided over by a High Court Judge or a District Judge. We think the better method is to refer it to the Court itself. Where acquisition follows requisition, we have provided that after the necessary notification of the intention to acquire, the procedure under the Land Acquisition Act should be followed.
34. The power of requisitioning can be exercised, under the law as it now stands, only for the purposes of the Union, and in most of the States for the purposes of the State. There is no power to requisition the land for the benefit of a company, or other persons or authorities as in the case of acquisition of land. We do not see any reason to enlarge the power and extend it to such cases.
35. We are of the view that the law of requisitioning should be embodied in a permanent code but should be brought into force by a notification, only when such action is deemed necessary. We have, also, provided that no property could be kept under requisition for a period longer than 5 years. If before the expiry of that period, the Government thinks that it is necessary to acquire the property, they are at liberty to do so and suitable provision has been made in that behalf. If, however, they decide not to acquire it, then it would not be proper for them to continue to keep the property indefinitely in their possession.
Back
