The fundamental right to acquire, hold, and possess property can be taken away, but the State/competent authority has to strictly adhere and comply with the mandate contained in the relevant legal provisions.

1. Writ petitions have been decided by a common judgement, these appeals are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgement.

2. Notification u/s 4(1) of the State Land Acquisition Act, 1990 (1931 AD), ('Act' for short) was issued on 14/11/2009, wherein the interested persons were notified and were given 15 days time for filing objections. 422 kanals and 12 = marlas of land were notified for being acquired for public purpose, viz. "construction of new Bus Stand and Approach Katra" at village Kundrian (Katra). Pursuant to issuance of the said notification, declaration u/s 6 of the 'Act' was also issued and steps in accordance with section 7&8 of the 'Act' were taken and notifications were issued u/s 9 & 9(a) of the 'Act'. Recourse was had to section 17 of the 'Act'. The appellants excepting appellants in OWP 1239/2010 (LPAOW 170/2011), challenged the noti#31;fication u/s 4(1) and all the appellants challenged the declaration issued u/s 6 of the 'Act' as also notification issued u/s 9 & 9-A of the 'Act'. The learned writ Court heard all the writ petitions together and disposed them of in terms of paragraphs 20 and 21 of the judgement pronounced on 07-07-2011.

3. The appellants are aggrieved of the said judgement and have challenged the same in the LPAs, inter alia, on the ground that the notification u/s 4(1) of the 'Act' is illegal and there is total non compliance with the mandate contained therein.

4. The learned counsel submitted that the writ Court has, at paragraph 20 of the judgement, observed that after the appellants are heard by the Collector in accordance with the mandate contained in section 5-A(2) of the 'Act' and after making recommendations to the Government, decision taken by the Government "shall be binding on the petitioners" and stated that same is illegal and such a direction would preclude the appellants from challenging the actions of the Gov#31;ernment even if same are illegal. Learned counsel submitted that such a direction is unwarranted in law and cannot be sustained. Learned counsel also submitted that the learned writ Court has repelled the challenge thrown to the notification issued u/s 4(1) of the 'Act' on the ground that the appellants have filed objections to the said notification and the purpose underlying the notification u/s 4(1) of the 'Act' was, thus, served and no prejudice can be said to have been caused to the appellants, is not a correct view taken in law. Learned counsel also submitted that the observation made in the judgement by the learned writ Court that "the obser#31;vation made in the judgement shall not prevent the respondents to invoke the provision of Section 17 of the 'Act', if so required," is also unwarranted as the said observation can be taken by the respondents to be a direction for invoking the provisions of section 17 of the 'Act'. Learned counsel, in support of their conten#31;tions, referred to and relied upon the judgements reported in AIR 1985 SC 1622, AIR 1990 SC 731 & 2011 AIR SCW 5240. Learned counsel accordingly prayed for allowing of the appeals. Paragraphs 20 & 22(A) of the impugned judgement are taken note of:

"20. In view of the law as referred above coupled with the position of the case in hand, it has to be concluded that the petitioners have not been heard in support of their objections effectively, therefore, acquisition proceedings under Sections 6,9 & 9A and Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act vis-'-vis land of the petitione4rs are held invalid. The notification issued under Section 4 of the Act is held to be valid. The respondent No. 2 in accordance with Section 5-A(2) of the Act shall hear the petitioners in support of their objections and thereafter shall formulate his report which shall contain his recommendations vis-'-vis each objection and thereafter such recommend#31;atory report shall be submitted to the Government and it is then for the Government to take any decision which shall be binding on the