Judgment

RANGANATH MISRA, J.:- We have heard counsel for the parties at considerable length but piecemeal spread over a number of days. Special Leave granted.

2. Five co-operative societies with membership of Government servants mostly of the lower strata filed six separate writ petitions before the AlIahabad High Court challenging the Notification under S. 4(1) and S. 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (1 of 1894) on several grounds. The principal contentions before the High Court were two-fold: (1) the co-operative societies consisting of the low paid Government servants having acquired the land for the purpose of providing residential accommodation to their members, the Ghaziabad Development Authority constituted by the State of Uttar Pradesh for the same purpose should not have been permitted to acquire the said land to their prejudice; and (2) there was no justification for depriving the petitioners of their right to representation under S. 5 A of the Acquisition Act in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The High Court by a common judgment dated 30th August, 1988, dismissed the writ petitions by negativing the several contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners. It may be pointed out that on behalf of the Neelam Sahakari Awas Samiti Ltd. two writ petitions were filed while each of the other four societies had filed one writ petition. That is how six Special Leave Petitions were filed before this Court and have now been converted into appeals on grant of leave.

4. Ghaziabad, within the State of Uttar Pradesh, virtually bordering Delhi is located at a distance of 28 kilometres from the New Delhi Railway Station in the trans-Jamuna area. It has of late become, apart from being a Railway junction, an industrial area as also an agglomeration sufficiently developed to call it a township. A Master Plan has been drawn up for the area and some portions have been developed while the lands of the five co-operative societies have not yet been improved on account of the pendency of this group of cases.

5. In course of the hearing of these appeals we were satisfied about the genuineness of the grievance advanced on behalf of the members through their respective co-operative societies and took the view that the members of the co-operative societies should not be denied residential accommodation for which they had taken effective steps before the acquisition for the Development Authority was notified. We took into consideration the total number of members as also the number of eligible members; the total area which the members had acquired and entrusted to the co-operative societies for construction; the capacity of the members to pay for the construction now charged by the Development Authority; the need of planned development of the area; and all other relevant facts and circumstances placed by all the parties before us and formed the opinion that it would be sufficient to meet the requirements of the members of these societies if each one of them was provided with a plot limited to an area of 80 square yards.

6. Total members entitled to allotment are 1739. Whether it should be individual plots or double storied construction should be permitted was seriously debated before us but we have come to the ultimate conclusion that instead of single storey construction double storey constructions would be convenient and economical. The interest of the members represented by their respective co-operative societies and the nature of the housing complex contemplated by the Development Authority have to be kept in view and ultimate decision, keeping the interest of both, has to be taken. Counsel for the Development Authority had canvassed before us that instead of confining construction of flats to two storeys, the normal pattern of five or six storeys could be adopted. High-rise construction for the poor section of the society would not be convenient - in old age many would have movement problem; many of the necessities for living would b