IMPORTANT POINTS
When a valuable right of land owners u/s 5A has been denied by invoking section 17(4), High Court ought to enter into merits of the case.
The Land Acquisition Act being expropriatory legislation deserves strict construction.

Judgment :-

S.B. Sinha, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 10.05.2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No. 7008 of 2007.

3. On or about 6.01.2006, a notification under Section 4 read with Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") was issued for acquisition of the land in question for an alleged public purpose, viz., for the development and utilization of land for residential/ commercial purpose. A declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 9.08.2006.

4. A writ petition was filed by the appellants challenging these notifications which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action.

5. On 14.11.2006, the government issued a notification under Section 4 read with Section 17(4) of the Act and on 15.11.2006 as also a declaration under Section 6 of the Act, for acquiring the land for public purpose, viz., for the development and utilization of land for outer ring road, green belt on both side, Pataudi Road to Jhajjar Road in the area of village Gokalgarh, District Rewari.

6. Appellants land was being used for residential purposes and which also has the Samadhis of the ancestors of the appellants and a Shiva temple. The revenue records confirm the existence of these pucca constructions.

7. On 14.03.2007, notices were issued to the appellants under Section 9 of the Act. Appellants filed objections thereto on 29.03.2007.

8. A writ petition was filed by the appellants, which was dismissed in limine by reason of the impugned judgment.

9. Appellants are, thus, before us.

10. The principal question which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the emergency powers in terms of Section 17 of the Act could have been resorted to by the State.

11. The Act has been enacted for the acquisition of land for public purposes and for Companies. Having regard to the provisions contained in Article 300A of the Constitution of India as also the provisions of Act, the State in exercise of its power of `eminent domain may deprive a person of his right to a property only when there exists a public purpose and a reasonable amount by way of compensation is offered for acquisition of his land. The Act fulfills the aforementioned criteria. It, however, lays down the details procedures therefor. It is also of some significance to notice that the Parliament, by reason of the Act, has imposed further restrictions/ conditions for acquisition of land for the benefit of the land-owner.

12. Right to file objection and hearing thereof to a notification issued by the appropriate government expressing its intention to acquire a property is a valuable right. Such a valuable right of hearing and particularly in a case of this nature could have been taken away only if conditions precedent for exercise of this emergency power stood satisfied. Sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Act is an exception to Section 5A of the Act.

An opinion of the government in this behalf is required to be formed if there exists an emergency. Existence of the foundational fact for invoking the aforementioned provision is, therefore, a sine qua non for formation of opinion. Such an subjective satisfaction must be based on an objective criteria. Ipse dixit on the part of the State would not serve the purpose. Appellants, in our opinion, had made out a case for examination of their cases in details. The nature of constructions and other features of the land sought to be acquired have been noticed by us hereinbefore.

13. The purported public purpose for which the land is to be acquired is for laying down a road.

We are not unmindful of the fact that the road connection is one of the purposes mentioned in Sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act in respect whereof Sub-section (4) thereof would apply. But the same would not mean that for the purpose of road connection