SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 417

2011 (5) SCC 553
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.S. SINGHVI AND A.K GANGULY, JJ
Sri Radhy Shyam (Dead) Through L.Rs. and others
Versus
State of U.P. and others
Civil Appeal NO.3261of 2011
Decided on : April 15, 2011

Headnote:A) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.136, LAND ACQUISITION ACT : S.17(1), S.17(4), S.4, S.5(a), S.6(1):- The notification issued by the State of U.P. under Section 4 r/w section 1 of Land Acquisition Act invoking the urgency clause dispensing with the dealing of objections under section 5,on the ground that it is urgently required for planned development of the industrial estates therein, was quashed on the ground that while dealing with the lands of suppressed and oppressed sections of he society in preference wih the claims of well to do sections of the society, putting the burden of proving the necessity of urgency clause or the lack of it on the poorer sections is not proper. The history of land acquisition for urgency clause is discussed.

       

JUDGMENT

1. G.S. Singhvi, J. Leave granted. This appeal is directed against order dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants questioning the acquisition of their land for planned industrial development of District Gautam Budh Nagar through Greater NOIDA Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the, "Development Authority") by invoking Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act"), as amended by Uttar Pradesh Act No.8 of 1974, was dismissed.

2. Upon receipt of proposal from the Development Authority for acquisition of 205.0288 hectares land of village Makora, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil and District Gautam Budh Nagar, which was approved by the State Government, notification dated 12.3.2008 was issued under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act. The relevant portions of the notification are extracted below:

"Under Sub-Section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (Act no.1 of 1894), the Governor is pleased to notify for general information that the land mentioned in the scheduled below, is needed for public purpose, namely planned industrial development in District Gautam Budh Nagar through Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority.

2. The Governor being of the opinion that the provisions of sub-section 1 of Section 17 of the said Act, are applicable to said land inasmuch as the said land is urgently required, for the planned industrial development in District Gautam Budh Nagar through Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and it is as well necessary to eliminate the delay likely to be caused by an enquiry under Section 5A of the said Act, the Governor is further pleased to direct under sub-section 4 of Section 17 of the said Act that the provisions of Section 5A of the said Act, shall not apply."

3. Since the appellants' land was also included in the notification, they made a representation to the Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Development Authority (Respondent No.4) with copies to the Chief Minister, Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development, U.P., the District Magistrate and the Special Officer, Land Acquisition, Gautam Buddh Nagar with the request that their land comprised in Khasra No.394 may not be acquired because they had raised construction 30-35 years ago and were using the property for abadi/habitation. The concerned functionaries/authorities did not pay heed to the request of the appellants and the State Government issued notification dated 19.11.2008 under Section 6 read with Section 9 of the Act.

4. The appellants challenged the acquisition of their land on several grounds including the following:

(i) That the land cannot be used for industrial purposes because in the draft Master Plan of Greater NOIDA (2021), the same is shown as part of residential zone.

(ii) That they had already constructed dwelling houses and as per the policy of the State Government, the residential structures are exempted from acquisition.

(iii) That the State Government arbitrarily invoked Section 17(1) read with Section 17(4) of the Act and deprived them of their valuable right to raise objections under Section 5-A.

(iv) The acquisition of land is vitiated by arbitrariness, mala fides and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution inasmuch as lands of the Member of Legislative Assembly and other influential persons were left out from acquisition despite the fact that they were not in abadi, but they were not given similar treatment despite the fact that their land was part of abadi and they had constructed dwelling units.

5. In support of their challenge to the invoking of Section 17(1) and (4), the appellants made detailed averments in paragraphs 11 and 16 and raised specific grounds A and F, which are extracted below:

"11. That as per the scheme of the said Act, each and every section from sections 4 to 17 has an independent role to play tho



































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top