SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.S. Singhvi, H.L. Gokhale and Ranjana P. Desai, JJ.
HUKAM CHAND - Appellants;
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA - Respondents.
With
BOHRU - Appellant;
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA - Respondents.
Civil Appeals No. 1519 of 2013 with No. 1520 of 2013
Decided on : February 21, 2013
(1973) 2 SCC 337; (1993) 4 SCC 255; (2012) 1 SCC 792; (2004) 8 SCC 14; (2005) 7 SCC 627; (2010) 11 SCC 242; (2011) 5 SCC 553 – Relied upon
(2001) 7 SCC 545 – Referred
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 6 – Appellants’ lands being acquired – Similarly situated lands of large industries left out – Proceedings vitiated being discriminative. (Para 21)
Facts of the case:
Appellant’s land, on which he had constructed building and was running a flour mill, was included in the lands to be acquired by the State of Haryana.
Despite his objections u/s 5(1) an allegations of discrimination authorities went ahead and issued notification u/s 6(1).
The writ petitions were disposed of/ dismissed.
Finding of the Court:
Provisions of Section 5A(2) are mandatory.
ORDER
1. Leave granted. Having failed to convince the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court to quash the acquisition of their land on the grounds of violation of Section 5A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') and discrimination, the Appellants have preferred these appeals.
2. For the sake of convenience, the facts arc being noticed from the record of the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 20303 of 2011.
3. Appellant - Bohru is the co-owner in possession of land comprised in Khewat No. 89, Khata No. 111, Rectangle No. 16, Killa No. 14/2 (4-12) situated in village Fazilwas, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. He constructed thereon a building consisting of 6 rooms with an open verandah, shed and courtyard. After obtaining a licence from the Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board, the Appellant started a flour mill under the name and style M/s. Dinesh Flour Mill.
4. By notification dated 14.12.2006 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, the Government of Haryana proposed the acquisition of land situated in seven villages, including Fazilwas, for setting up Choudhary Devi Lal Industrial Model Township. The Appellant filed objections under Section 5A(1) of the Act and pleaded that his land may not be acquired because he had raised the construction, and was running a flour mill since 2005. After considering the report of the Land Acquisition Collector, the State Government issued declaration under Section 6(1), which was published vide notification dated 18.1.2008.
5. The Appellant challenged the acquisition of his land in CWP No. 7424/2008. Likewise, other landowners filed writ petitions questioning the notifications issued by the State Government under Sections 4(1) and 6(1) of the Act. All the writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court as infructuous because a statement was made on behalf of the State Government that the declaration under Section 6(1) was issued beyond the time prescribed under that section and fresh notification had been issued under Section 4(1) on 25.4.2008.
6. Since the Appellant's land was included in notification dated 25.4.2008, he filed detailed objections dated 9.6.2008, paragraphs 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 of which are extracted below:
3. That the Objector/Petitioner have got constructed with A class RCC Well developed building consisting 6 rooms along with open verandah, shed, court yard and further the objector/Petitioner is running a flour mill in the shape of small scale unit after obtaining all the mandatory licence etc. from the concerned government department and further the electricity connection was taken by the Petitioner for the above purpose. The Petitioner is running the above flour mill in the name of M/s. Dinesh Kumar Flour mill and the said project is more than one crore rupees. It is submitted that the Petitioner is running the above said flour mill before issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred as Act). The above atta chakki is being run by the Petitioner/objector from 2005. For the above purpose the objector/Petitioner had also taken loan from the Gurgaon Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Gurgaon in the year 2005 for the running of his above factory etc. It is submitted that the objector/Petitioner is running a flour mill by the name and style of Dinesh Kumar Flour mill in the above land. A copy of the electricity bills before issuance of notification Under Section 4 of the Act, of the above premises are annexed herewith as Annexure-O/2 and O/3. The Petitioner is running his atta mill in the suit land before issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. The Petitioner is not having any source of income except the above factory. The photographs of the premises in question is annexed herewith as Annexure-O/4.
5. That although the objector/Petitioner has raised the factories and other constructions, on the land in question much prior to issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, and as per pol
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.