JUDGMENT :

Surya Kant, J.

1. The issue that falls for consideration in this case revolves around the true construction, meaning and import of the expression ‘vacant land’ contained in Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (in short, the ‘Ceiling Act’), especially with reference to sub-clause (i) thereof.

2. Notwithstanding the fact that ‘urban land’ or any regulatory measures in relation thereto fall within the exclusive domain of a State Legislature in terms of Entry 18 of List II—State List under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, the Ceiling Act was enacted by Parliament, in exercise of its powers under Article 252 of the Constitution for which as many as 11 States passed a Resolution authorising the Parliament to enact a law imposing a ceiling on urban property, more so after the imposition of a ceiling on agricultural lands in most of the States. The Ceiling Act was, consequently, enacted to provide, inter alia, imposition of a ceiling on ‘vacant land’ in urban agglomeration, the acquisition for such lands in excess of the ceiling limit, to regulate the construction of buildings on such lands and also to prevent the concentration of urban land in the hands of a person etc.

Legislative Scheme of the Ceiling Act:

3. Section 3 provides that ‘on and from the commencement of this Act’, no person shall be entitled to hold any ‘vacant land’ in excess of the ceiling limit in the territories to which the Act applies under Section 1(2) thereof. Section 4 provides distinct ceiling limits for different urban agglomerations falling within categories A to D in Schedule I. Section 6 of the Ceiling Act obligates the person holding ‘vacant land’ in excess of ceiling limit to file statement whereupon the Competent Authority would prepare a draft statement under Section 8 of the Act and after considering any objection received against it, Section 9 contemplates a final statement determining the vacant land held by the person concerned. Such ‘vacant land’ shall then be notified under Section 10 of the Act and would be acquired by the State Government. Once, the ‘vacant land’ is notified as excess land, the competent authority under sub-Section (3) would issue a declaration whereupon the ‘vacant land’ shall be deemed to have vested absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances. The person in possession of the ‘vacant land’ on receipt of the notice in writing under sub-section (5) must surrender or deliver possession thereof to the State Government and in the event of his refusal or failure to comply with such order, the Competent Authority is authorised under sub-section (6) to take possession of the vacant land by use of force as may be necessary.

4. The land owner who has been expropriated of the ‘vacant land’ would receive ‘payment’ as may be determined on receipt of his claim in accordance with Section 11 of the Ceiling Act.

5. Section 20 nevertheless empowers the State Government either on its own motion or otherwise to exempt such ‘vacant land’ from the provisions of the Ceiling Act if it is found to be necessary or expedient in the public interest and/or when the State Government is satisfied that the applicability of the provisions of taking away the land would cause undue hardship to such person.

6. In the context of the facts on record which are discussed succinctly hereinafter, Section 2(b), (g),(o) and (q) of the Ceiling Act have some bearing and the same are reproduced below:

“2. Definition.—In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

xxx xxx xxx

(b) “building regulations” means the regulations contained in the master plan, or the law in force governing the construction of buildings;

xxx xxx xxx

(g) “land appurtenant”, in relation to any building, means—

(i) in an area where there are building regulations, the minimum extent of land required under such regulations to be kept as open space for the enjoyment of such building, which in no case shall exceed five hundred squ