Back
High Court Of Delhi
ANGIRA DEVI GUPTA - Appellant
Versus
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, DELHI - Respondent
Civil Writ 889 of 1983
Decided On : 04/15/1985
LAND ACQUISITION - SECTION 4 NOTIFICATION - ESSENTIAL MANDATORY REQUIREMENT - ABSENCE OF NOTIFICATION - ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS VOID - WRIT PETITION ALLOWED - IMPUGNED DECLARATIONS AND AWARD QUASHED - POSSESSION RESTORED TO PETITIONER.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenged the acquisition proceedings, declarations, and award related to her land, alleging that the land was not covered by the preliminary notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that she did not receive any notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the issuance of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act is a condition precedent to the exercise of any further power under the Act and that the absence of such notification renders the acquisition proceedings void. The court also found that the petitioner was not served with any notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act and that she had no knowledge of the acquisition proceedings until 1983.
Issues: Whether the acquisition proceedings were valid in the absence of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Narendrajit Singh and another v. The State of U. P. and another, where it was held that a notification under Section 4(1) is a condition precedent to the making of a notification under Section 6(1) and that any notification which is the first step towards depriving a man of his property must be strictly construed.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned declarations and award, and directed the Delhi Development Authority to restore possession of the land to the petitioner.
( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks the quashing of the acquisition proceedings pursuant to notification dated November 13, 1959 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acqisition Act, 1894, declarations dated December 6, 1966 January 2, 1969 under Section 6 of the Act culminating in an Award No. 60/83 dated January 17, 1983 for the acquisition 30 bighas 6 biswas of land belonging to the petitioner situate in village Mehrauli.
( 2 ) THE facts are not in dispute. In 1959 respondent No. 2 issued a notification No. 15 (lll)/59/lsgdated November 13,l959 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) notifying that land admeasuring 34070 acres and marked with blocks and description specified in the notification was required by the Government at the public expense for public purpose, namely, the planned development of Delhi. The said notification covered, inter alia, the land of village of Mehrauli but specifically excluded from the purview of the acqisition proceedings "government land and evacuee land".
( 3 ) THE land bearing khasra Nos, 1452, 1455, 2278/1456-1455, 1458 to 1460, 2006/1462, 1531, 1352 2071/1533, 2072/1553, 2073/1533, 1534 to 1537, 1539 to 1543, 2362/1544. 2363/1544, 2354/1544, 1545 to 1549, 1551, 1552, 1639, 1642 to 1651, 2017/1652. 2016/1652 and 1654 to 1658 measuring 30 bighas- 6 biswas situated in village Mehrauli was acquired evacuee land and vested in the Government under the Displaced Persons (Compensation 8 Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. In 1960 an auction notice was published by the Office of the Regional Settlement Commissioner, Government of India, Ministry of Rehabilitation, putting the aforesaid and being evacuee land for sale by public auction. The public auction was held on March 3, 1960 in pursuance of the powers conferred upon the Managing Officer under Section 20 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. At the public auction the petitioner herein gave the highest bid for purchase of the said land for Rs. 72,000. 00. Har pid was accepted and approved by the Coppetent Authority. The sum of Rs. 72,000. 00 was paid by the petitioner by adjustment of compensation of her and her associate s claim against properties left by her in Pakistan. A sale certificate was issued under Rule 90 on February 22, 24, 1966 declaring the petitioner as purchaser of the said land with effect from August 25. 1960. A copy of the sale certificate is attached as Annexure-II to writ petition.
( 4 ) THE petitioner then filed an application for mutation proceedings to get the properties recorded in her favour in the revenue records. The application although in the year 1966 was processed in 1981 and said land was finally mutated in the name of the petitioner in the revenue records on October 8,1982.
( 5 ) ACCORDING to the allegations in the writ petition the petitioner came to know on or about April 28, 1983 about the acquisition proceedings when the agents/employees of the respondents were seeking to enter upon the petitioner s land to take possession. On enquiry the petitioner was told that the said land had been acquired by the respondents. The petitioner then came to know that declarations dated December 7,1966 and January 2, 1969 were issued including the said land of the petitioner in it, although the said land was not covered by the preliminary notification dated November 13, 1959 issued under Section 4. The petitioner also states that she did not receive any notices under sections 9 and 10 and she was never informed by the respondents probably for the reason that the land was not mutated in the name of the petitioner in the official records. It may be that all along the said land was shown as Government land in those records, and thus no notice was thought to be necessary. The petitioner further came to know that award in respect of part of the land was made on January 17, 1983. It is then that the petitioner
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
