Important POINTS
Acquisition of land for a “building scheme” as contemplated by Section 192 could not be made unless such a scheme was validly framed after following the prescribed procedure, and was duly sanctioned by the State Government.
A mere development plan to provide facilities to the public, such as those within the contemplation of Section 52(2)(c), to which the municipal fund could be applied, was not required to follow the procedure under Section 192 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911.
It is not necessary for the Collector to personally authorise the publication by beat of drum. It is the publication of the substance in the locality which is a material factor so as to invite the attention of the interested persons towards the intention of the Government to acquire the land.
If certain lands earlier notified for acquisition had to be released under peculiar circumstances, it cannot amount to discrimination.

Headnote:Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 – Sections 192 and 52 (2)(c) – Acquisition of land for a “building scheme” as contemplated by Section 192 could not be made unless such a scheme was validly framed after following the prescribed procedure, and was duly sanctioned by the State Government – The present scheme not being a “building scheme” under Section 192, but merely a development plan to provide facilities to the public, such as those within the contemplation of Section 52(2)(c), to which the municipal fund could be applied, it was, therefore, not required to follow the procedure under Section 192 (Para 11)
       Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 – Section 52 (2)(c) – The objection that the municipal fund could not be applied for providing residential, commercial and medical facilities not tenable – The facilities that a municipality is empowered to provide under the Act may involve acquisition of land as it is required for the purpose of the Act and therefore, it may make a request to the State Government to acquire the lands required for the purpose, and bear the cost of acquisition. (Para 13)
       Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952 – Section 11 – The development work undertaken by the Notified Area Committee could be undertaken by it under the provisions of the Punjab Municipal Act and, therefore, the permission granted under the Punjab Periphery Act, 1952 is not tainted with illegality. (Para 14)
       Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 4 r/w sections 9 and 3(c) – The Collector contemplated under Section 9 is one defined under Section 3(c) which means the Collector of the District and includes the Deputy Commissioner and any officer specially appointed by the Appropriate Government to perform the functions of the Collector under the Act – It is not necessary for the Collector to personally authorise the publication by beat of drum – It is the publication of the substance in the locality which is a material factor so as to invite the attention of the interested persons towards the intention of the Government to acquire the land – Such ministerial functions can be performed by any one authorised by the competent authority – The defects pointed out by the petitioners can at best be called an irregularity which does not vitiate the publication of the notification. (Para 18)
       Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 4 – Respondents had good reasons for not acquiring lands over which there stood permanent structures which had been raised after getting building plans sanctioned from the concerned authority–No evidence of the appellant having raised the structure after getting a building plan duly sanctioned by the concerned authority–The mere fact that the shop was given a number is not at all relevant in the facts of the case. (Para24)
       Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 48 – Releasing some lands earlier notified for acquisition does not by itself does not justify the conclusion that there was discrimination in the matter of acquisition of land – The notification for acquisition being quashed by High Court and later restored on review – Many constructions coming up during the interregnum on portion of acquired lands, forcing their release from acquisition – No discrimination by the authorities. (Para 25)
       Facts of the case :
       The lands spread over eleven Pockets within the Notified Area of Mani Majra, which has since vested in the Municipal Corporation of Chandigarh were sought to be acquired for Scheme Nos.2 and 3. Pockets 1 to 6 related to Scheme No.2, while Pockets 9 to 11 related to Scheme No.3.
       It is not disputed that so far as Pocket Nos.1 to 6 are concerned, the Notifications under Section 4 of the Act were issued on different dates between May 25, 1989 and October 12, 1989. It is also not disputed that several awards have been made and many of the land owners have received the compensation awarded, but the appellants herein have challenged the acquisition proceedings mainly on two grounds, namely that in the absence of a ‘building scheme’ framed under Section 192 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 no land could be acquired under the provisions of the Act for the purposes of the Scheme. Secondly, the appellants challenged the proceedings on the ground that the Notification under Section 4 of the Act was not published in the manner required, and in particular on the ground that there was no publication of the substance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act in the locality.
       Findings of the Court :
       The permission granted u/s 11 of Punjab Periphery Act, 1952 also related to land of the appellant pertaining to pocket no 5.
       The substance of the notification was published in the locality in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of 1894 Act.
       The notification for acquisition being quashed by High Court and later restored on review. Many constructions coming up during the interregnum on portion of acquired lands, forcing their release from acquisition. No discrimination by the authorities.
       Result : Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

B.P. SINGH, J.—

1.In this batch of appeals the common judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated April 28, 2003 disposing of the Writ Petitions has been assailed. In the Writ Petitions before the High Court, the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’) by issuance of Notifications by the Chandigarh Administration under Section 4 thereof had been challenged which has been rejected by the High Court by its impugned judgment and order. The lands were sought to be acquired for Scheme Nos.2 and 3 and were spread over eleven Pockets within the Notified Area of Mani Majra, which has since vested in the Municipal Corporation of Chandigarh. Pockets 1 to 6 related to Scheme No.2, while Pockets 9 to 11 related to Scheme No.3.

2.It is not disputed that so far as Pocket Nos.1 to 6 are concerned, the Notifications under Section 4 of the Act were issued on different dates between May 25, 1989 and October 12, 1989. It is also not disputed that several awards have been made and many of the land owners have received the compensation awarded, but the appellants herein have challenged the acquisition proceedings, mainly on two grounds, namely that in the absence of a ‘building scheme’ framed under Section 192 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 no land could be acquired under the provisions of the Act for the purposes of the Scheme. Secondly, the appellants challenged the proceedings on the ground that the Notification under Section 4 of the Act was not published in the manner required, and in particular on the ground that there was no publication of the substance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act in the locality. A few background facts may be noticed at the threshold:

3.The Mani Majra Gram Panchayat was declared a Notified Area under Section 241 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 on August 19, 1973. By Notification dated June 11, 1976, issued under Section 242 of the Act of 1911 certain provisions of the Act of 1911 such as Sections 3, 53, 58, and 192 were extended to the Mani Majra Notified Area. Section 243 of the Act of 1911 provides as follows :

“243. Application of Act to notified area. - For the purposes of any section of this Act which may be extended to a notified area the committee appointed for such area under section 242 shall be deemed to be a municipal committee under this Act and the area to be a municipality”.

It was urged before the High Court that without framing building scheme under Section 192 of the Act of 1911, the acquisition of the land for residential-cum-commercial complex (Scheme No.2 of the Notified Area Committee) could not be said to be for a public purpose and was contrary to law. It was argued that though the definition of “public purpose” under the Act included, under Section 3(f)(vii), the provision of land for any other scheme or development sponsored by Government, or with the prior approval of the appropriate government, by a local authority, in the context of the Act of 1911 it must mean a “building plan” contemplated by Section 192 of the Act of 1911. Since such a plan was never prepared by the Notified Area under Section 192, in the absence of a valid “building Scheme”, no land could be acquired for that purpose.

4.Section 58 of the Act of 1911 provides for acquisition of land under the Act at the request of the Committee. It reads as under :

“58.Acquisition of land - When any land, whether within or without the limits of a municipality, is required for the purposes of this Act, the [State] Government may, at the request of the committee, proceed to acquire it under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and on payment by the committee of the compensation awarded under that Act, and of any other charges incurred in acquiring the land, the land shall vest in the committee.

Explanation. When any land is required for a new street or for the improvement of an existing street, the committee may proceed to acquire, in addition to the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document