Abstract
The chapter presents the citation network of a set of land acquisition judgements from the Supreme Court of India and tries to analyse the citation behaviour of the apex court in terms of the network structure. We find that the structure of the network displays ‘small-world’ properties and the degree distribution reveals that most cases are rarely cited and there are only a handful which are cited very often. We also find a significant overlap between the benches of important judgements in the network.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
There exists a rich literature on the role of precedents in determining and shaping court judgements. Eskridge (1991) and Knight and Epstein (1996) discuss the possible ways in which precedents can affect decisions. The conventional approach is to view precedents as a conspicuous explanation for judicial decisions. The second mechanism, as explained by the above set of papers, by which precedents enter into the decision-making process of judges, is by constraining judges from implementing their preferences. Justices have personal preferences regarding which particular rules they would like to be established in a case under consideration. However, they might have to modify their position to take into account a constraint of having to position themselves close to the established precedents. Legal scholars, however, are divided in their opinion regarding the actual strength of a norm which respects precedents and thereby aligns decisions in accordance to what the precedents demand (Landes and Posner 1976; Segal and Spaeth 1996).
- 2.
The issue of land acquisition has become highly contentious in the last decade with the outbreak of several mass movements and protests against government acquisition of land and eviction of peasants from their properties in many parts of the country (Sarkar 2007). The resistance at Singur and Nandigram in West Bengal, those at POSCO in Orissa or the long drawn Narmada Bachao Andolan has left scholars and activists debating and writing on this issue extensively. The complex yet significant role that a limited resource like land plays in the Indian context makes it a potential area of legal conflicts. In fact, a close scrutiny into the case laws on land acquisition reveals a huge volume of litigation fought with reference to the Land Acquisition Act of 1894. In India, private land is acquired for public purpose by involving the principle of eminent domain which affirms that private property can only be taken for public use by compensating the land losers. Essentially it is these two aspects of the law—compensation and public purpose—which have witnessed repeated challenges in court. This has been coupled with the less than assiduous implementation of the law by the government officials—thus adding to legal contests (Banerjee et al. 2007; Desai 2011; Ghatak and Ghosh 2011).
- 3.
Fowler and Jeon (2008) have attempted to analyse the citation behaviour of the US Supreme Court by using the tools of network analysis. Their work clearly reveals that stare decisis played a crucial role in the decision-making process of the US Supreme Court and in fact, has gradually strengthened its influence. Further, the use of quantitative techniques has helped them to identify important precedents in the history of the apex court of the USA.
- 4.
- 5.
The data were last updated from www.manupatra.com on July 10, 2014.
- 6.
These judgements might have cited or received citations from judgements not in this network.
- 7.
Section 17, LAA: Special powers in case of urgency. In cases of urgency whenever the [appropriate Government], so directs, the Collector, though no such award has been made, may, on the expiration of 15 days from the publication of the notice mentioned in section 9, sub-section 1 [take possession of any land needed for a public purpose]. Such land shall thereupon [vest absolutely in the [Government], free from all encumbrances.
- 8.
Section 4, LAA: Publication of preliminary notification and power of officers thereupon.—(1) Whenever it appears to the [appropriate Government] the land in any locality [is needed or] is likely to be needed for any public purpose [or for a company], a notification to that effect shall be published in the Official Gazette [and in two daily newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional language], and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality [(the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice, being hereinafter referred to as the date of the publication of the notification)].
- 9.
Section 6, LAA: Declaration that land is required for a public purpose.
- 10.
Section 23, LAA: Matters to be considered on determining compensation.
- 11.
The paper is a small part of an ongoing research on citation behaviour of Indian courts. Currently we are working on the construction of the entire network of judgements from the Supreme Court of India. Our objective is to test the robustness of the empirical results presented in this chapter and come up with a theoretical explanation of the pattern of judicial citations.
References
Banerjee AV, Bardhan P, Basu K, Chaudhury MD, Ghatak M, Guha AS, Majumdar M, Mookerjee D, Ray D (2007) Beyond nandigram: industrialisation in West Bengal. Econ Polit Wkly 42(17):1487–1489
Desai M (2011) Land acquisition law and the proposed changes. Econ Polit Wkly 46(26and27):95–100
Eskridge W (1991) Overriding supreme court statutory interpretation decisions. Yale Law J 101(2):331–455
Fowler JH, Jeon S (2008) The authority of supreme court precedent. Social Networks 30(1):16–30
Ghatak M, Ghosh P (2011) The land acquisition bill: a critique and a proposal. Econ Polit Wkly 46(41):65–72
Goyal S, Leij MJ van der, MoragaGonzalez JL (April 2006) Economics: an emerging small world. J Polit Econ 114(2):403–412
Knight J, Epstein L (1996) The norm of stare decisis. Am J Polit Sci 40(4):1018–1035
Landes WM, Posner RA (1976) Legal precedent: a theoretical and empirical analysis. J Law Econ 19(2):249–307
Sarkar A (2007) Development and displacement: land acquisition in West Bengal. Econ Polit Wkly 42(16):1435–1442
Segal JA, Spaeth HJ (1996) The influence of stare decisis on the votes of united states supreme court justices. Am J Polit Sci 40(4):971–1003
Watts DJ (1999) Small worlds: the dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton university press, UK.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
List of Important Judgements
List of Important Judgements
Radhy Shyam vs. State of U.P., 2011, MANU/SC/0429/2011.
Dev Sharan vs. State of U.P., 2011, MANU/SC/0178/2011.
Banda Dev. Authority vs. Agarwal, 2011, MANU/SC/0515/2011.
Raghbir Singh Sehrawat vs. State of Haryana, 2011, MANU/SC/1429/2011. Kamal Trading vs.
State of West Bengal, 2011,MANU/SC/1492/2011.
Offshore Holdings vs. Bangalore Dev. Authority, 2011, MANU/SC/0060/2011.
Valliyammal vs. Spl. Tehsildar, 2011, MANU/SC/0877/2011.
Anjani Molu Dessai vs. State of Goa, 2010, MANU/SC/1156/2010.
Surinder Singh Brar vs. Union of India, 2012, MANU/SC/0849/2012.
V. Chandrasekaran vs. the Administrative Officer, 2012, MANU/SC/0751/2012.
Women Education Trust vs. State of Haryana, 2013, MANU/SC/0504/2013.
Patasi Devi vs. State of Haryana, 2012, MANU/SC/0706/2012.
Gojer Brothers vs. State of West Bengal, 2013, MANU/SC/1279/2013.
Haryana Industrial Dev. Corp. vs. Udal, 2013, MANU/SC/0637/2013.
Darshan Lal Nagpal vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, 2012, MANU/SC/0008/2012.
Delhi Airtech Services vs. State of U.P., 2011, MANU/SC/0956/2011.
Usha Stud vs. State of Haryana, 2013, MANU/SC/0286/2013.
Bhule Ram vs. Union of India, 2014, MANU/SC/0249/2014.
Brij Pal Bhargava vs. State of U.P., 2011, MANU/SC/0149/2011.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer India
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chakraborty, R., Chakraborty, S., Kundu, R. (2016). Network of Legal Citations: An Analysis of Some Supreme Court Decisions on Land Acquisition in India. In: Banerjee, S., Mukherjee, V., Haldar, S. (eds) Understanding Development. India Studies in Business and Economics. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2455-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2455-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-2454-9
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-2455-6
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)