Chhattisgarh High Court: Goutam Bhaduri, J., while allowing the petition and quashing the order issued by the State of Chhattisgarh held that,
“Two of the officers of Food Corporation of India who are not empowered to have attended the meeting to give away the FCI Land in absence of any resolution by the Board of Directors, acting on behalf of the Corporation cannot alienate the part of the land.”
In the present petition, the mention of a letter had been made which was addressed to the Collector wherein he had permitted the State to take possession of land of 100 acres from the Food Corporation of India. Further, the letter purported that the FCI holds the land ad-measuring 111.61 acres at village Kapa and out of the said land 100 acres was to be given to Chhattisgarh Housing Board and 11.61 acres was to be kept with FCI. In lieu of the land received by Chhattisgarh Housing Board, the board will give the government land of about 70 acres situated at village Sejbahar.
FCI challenged the direction issued by the State and the ground was that the general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs and business of the Corporation vests in the Board of Directors which exercise all such powers and do all such acts and things as may be exercised or done by the Corporation under the Food Corporation Act, 1964.
Further, as per Section 37 of the Act, FCI may delegate powers by general or special order to the Chairman or any other member of the Board of Directors or the Secretary or other officer of the Corporation with certain conditions and limitations as may be specified in the Order.
Delegation of power was made to the Managing Director for purchase of land/acquisition as on 31-03-1993, which implies that no officer other lower than the rank of the Managing Director can purchase or acquire the land on behalf of FCI.
Adding to the above, Corporation purchased the land of 111.61 acres from defence and some part of it was purchased from the State at village Kapa, for construction of grain storage depots.
A meeting was held for the above purpose wherein Collector, Regional and Deputy Manager of FCI and representatives of Chhattisgarh House Board had participated. Subsequently, Officers of FCI had communicated to Chhattisgarh Housing Board to evaluate the land but eventually, the said resolution was not acted upon.
Further, petitioner’s counsel submitted that property of FCI cannot be done away with by few of the officers and the State Government without any authority cannot force FCI to force to comply with the above-mentioned letter.
Decision
On perusal of Section 3 to 7 of the Food Corporation Act, 1964, it would be noted that FCI is a body corporate having a juristic entity.
The question that arose was,
“Whether the Regional Manager and Deputy Manager of the petitioner’s Corporation were authorised to deal with the matters of alienating and exchange of land of Housing Board?”
Referring to Section 37 of the Act, that talk about the delegation of power wherein it is stated that,
Food Corporation may, by general or special order in writing delegate to the Chairman or any other member of the Board of Directors of the Secretary or other Officer of the Corporation, subject to such conditions and limitations, if any, as may be specified in the order, such of its powers and functions under the said Act.
Thus, with reference of Section 37 of the Act and annexure regarding delegation of powers, the Court held that,
If two of the officers of the Corporation participated in certain meeting and signed the resolution/agreement wherein they decided to give away 100 acres of the land of Food Corporation of India to the Housing Board and in lieu thereof, accepted to take the Government land of 70 acres situated at village Sejbahar at the expense of Housing Board, the same cannot be made binding to the Corporation which is a Body Corporate.
Ratio of Vice-Chancellor v. S.K. Ghosh, AIR 1954 SC 217 was relied on and is applicable in the present case wherein it was stated that though a body corporate is a legal entity it has neither a living mind nor voice. It can only express its will in a formal way by a resolution.
Hence, in the present case, the alleged resolution cannot be acted upon and the resolution of meeting to give away 100 acres of land by FCI would be a scrap of paper and cannot be acted upon. [FCI v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2020 SCC OnLine Chh 10, decided on 14-02-2020]
