The Court observed that Section 5 of the LARR Act, 2013 makes it clear that whenever a Social Impact Assessment study is required to be prepared under Section 4 of the Act, the government should ensure that a public hearing is held in the affected area so as to ascertain the views of the affected families and the same have to recorded and included in the Social Impact Assessment Report.
“We have discussed the above matters elaborately for the basic and primary reason that Social Impact Assessment study cannot be seen as an empty formality; the public is entitled to know, as of right, the adverse impact and consequences they are likely to suffer, on account of the proposed acquisition,” the Court said.
Further, the Court noted that only after undergoing the mandatory requirements contained under Chapter II of LARR Act, which deals with the determination of Social Impact and Public Purpose, the government can proceed with the acquisition of lands.
The Court observed that even if the SIA study is undertaken and ultimately, the Expert Group rejects the proposal, the government would have to take a decision to abandon the project.
In the case of Silverline, the Court noted that the State government is at the initial stage of understanding the social impact that is likely to occur if it proceeds with the acquisition of land.
Therefore, it cannot be said that the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the LARR Act, 2013, contained under Chapter IV, dealing with notification and acquisition, publication of preliminary notification, etc., would come into operation at this stage of the proceeding, the Court held.
It, accordingly, allowed the State government’s appeal and set aside the order of the single-judge.
Source: Barandbench
