Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Adarsh Kumar Goel, Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
Rameshwar & Others - Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana & Others - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 8788, 8794, 8791 & 8782 of 2015
Decided On : 12-03-2018
(2016) 11 SCC 378; (2011) 12 SCC 375; (2011) 10 SCC 608; (1980) 2 SCC 471; (1964) 4 SCR 733; (1986) 1 SCC 133; (1992) 1 SCC 534; (2011) 8 SCC 161 – Relied upon
(1979) 3 SCC 489; (1986) 4 SCC 566; (2010) 1 RCR (Civil) 412 – Referred
(b) Administrative action – Judicial review – Land acquisition – For public purpose of developing industrial township – Developers granted licences after section 6 declaration – Acquisition dropped just two days before making of award and land released in favour of developers – Resulting in unjust enrichment to developers – Fraud on power – Proper course would be to sustain acquisition and vest the land in State agency for whose use acquisition was initiated. (Para 30)
(2016) 11 SCC 378 – Relied upon
(c) Administration of justice – Relief – Depends upon who the real victim is and to what extent solace can be granted to him – In a case such as the present, victims cannot be left to seek relief of annulment of transaction individually – At the same time public purpose of acquisition will have to be subserved. (Para 33)
(d) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 11 – Acquisition dropped just before pronouncement of award, albeit for extraneous motives – Fraud on power – Unjust enrichment – Held, acquisition was complete – Award deemed to have been passed on the date when it was supposed to be pronounced i.e. on 26.08.2007 – At the same time, interest of those landholders who had not parted with their holdings and had faced the acquisition and had not participated in the proceedings ought to be secured – Directions given. (Para 35, 36, 38, 39)
(2011) 8 SCC 161 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
These appeals by special leave are directed against the common Judgment and Order dated 15.12.2014 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing Civil Writ Petition No.23769 of 2011 with other connected matters.
The High Court held that dropping of acquisition process just before pronouncement of award and release of land in favour of developers who had purchased land after section 4 and 6 notification and declaration was fraud on power. High Court therefore quashed the acquisition proceedings and orders of release of land and directed return of land to land owners.
Finding of the Court:
The transactions entered into between the landholders and the concerned builders/private entities in the present case were not voluntary and were brought about by fraudulent influence. Certain ‘middlemen’ and builders enriched themselves at the expense of the landholders and public interest which was to be achieved by acquisition.
The decisions dated 24.08.2007 and 29.01.2010 were nothing but fraud on power.
Result: Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the common Judgment and Order dated 15.12.2014 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing Civil Writ Petition No.23769 of 2011 with other connected matters. Appeal arising from Civil Writ Petition No.23769 of 2011 namely Civil Appeal No.8788 of 2015, has been taken as the lead matter and the facts stated therein are dealt with in detail.
2. The aforesaid Civil Writ Petition No.23769 of 2011 was filed by 117 landholders for the following principal relief:
“a. Issue writ direction or order, especially in the nature of certiorari quashing the entire action of the respondents who invoked Sections 4 & 6 for the alleged public purpose but ultimately compelled the petitioners to be divested of their valuable and fertile land at throwaway prices under the threat of acquisition to the private persons and consequently after issuing Section 6 and at the stage of final proceedings under Section 9, the acquisition was withdrawn with fraudulent intentions after the land was purchased by the private builders in active connivance with State functionaries and further the entire acquisition proceedings were initiated with mala fide intention, illegally and in violation of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The same is vitiated by fraud and all transactions including the sale deeds etc. are liable to be set aside without invoking the provisions of Part VII of the Act and with a further prayer for an enquiry/investigation through an independent agency in respect of the entire fraud played by the respondents and their officials;….”
3. The relevant facts leading to the filing and disposal of the aforesaid writ petition were:-
(i) On 27.08.2004 Haryana Government, Industries Department issued a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (“Act” for short) for acquiring lands admeasuring about 912 Acres from three villages namely, Manesar, Lakhnoula and Naurangpur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon for setting up Chaudhari Devi Lal Industrial Township, to be planned as an Integrated Complex for residential, recreational and other public purposes. The notification was duly published in newspapers. The landholders including some of the writ petitioners filed their objections under Section 5A of the Act.
(ii) Soon after the initiation of acquisition, various sale deeds were executed by the landholders including some of the writ petitioners in favour of certain builders/private entities. Some such builders/private entities who had recently purchased the lands also preferred objections under Section 5A of the Act.
(iii) On 26.02.2005, a report was prepared by Land Acquisition Collector recommending to the State Government that land admeasuring 224 acres be released from acquisition. Thereafter, appropriate notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 25.08.2005 in respect of rest of the land admeasuring 688 acres.
(iv) This acquisition was subject matter of challenge in number of Writ Petitions filed by the landholders and the subsequent purchasers viz. builders/private entities.
(v) Even after issuance of notification under Section 6 of the Act, the builders/private entities continued approaching the landholders. It was submitted that the landholders were being shown Award Nos.7, 8, 9, 10 and 12, all passed on 09.03.2006 in respect of adjoining villages for the same purpose namely setting up of Chaudhary Devi Lal Industrial Township, where compensation was awarded @ Rs.12.5 lakhs per acre. In all these cases, notifications under Section 4 were issued on 17.09.2004 while declarations under Section 6 were issued on 27.10.2004 and the lands covered under Award Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 were i) 114 Kanals 02 Marlas, ii) 68 Kanals 15 Marlas, iii) 43 Biswas, iv) 65 Kanals 08 Marlas and v) 3515 Kanals 01 Marlas respectively.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
