2019 Supreme(J&K) 506
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Rashid Ali Dar, J.
Omesh Singh and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
State of J&K and Ors. - Respondent
OWP No. 1699/2017
Decided On : 17-08-2019
For the Appellant :Aruna Thakur and Paritsha Parmar, Advocates
For the Respondents:S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG and R.K.S. Thakur, Advocate
Headnote:
Land Acquisition Act - Section 4(1) - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 and 14 - Constitution of J&K - Section 103 - Poverty Reduction - Damage To Property - Collector Land Acquisition - Certificate Of Fitness - Purposes Of Construction Of Road - Petitioner got knowledge of issuance of aforesaid Notification through passersby and immediately efforts were made to find out whether any such Notification had been issued - In pursuance of application filed under Right to Information Act Notification which was published in newspaper was provided - Road was sanctioned under package - Since construction of road was causing damage to property and residents of area Collector Land Acquisition recommended high level team to be constituted to explore possibility of alternate take off point of road - Respondents brought issue to knowledge of concerned authorities who instead of permitting alternate take off point permitted respondents to change alignment - An application under Right to Information Act was filed seeking certain information from Public Information Officer office of Executive Engineer PMGSY Division Held It is admitted case of parties that to provide road connectivity to hitherto before neglected remote hilly areas villages a survey was conducted for construction of road - During course of recce of said road respondents decided to go for various options - This appears to have been done keeping in view topography of area and limited agricultural land available in village which serves as economic lifeline of local residents - On weighing various options - It was decided to connect village within main road as alternate alignment was technically feasible inasmuch as there was saving road length better bridge site location and avoiding of prima agricultural land of lower - It is not disputed that proposed road in terms of basic survey report was to originate pass through village and terminate - However in view of difficult terrain and landslide area respondents had to look for a better option keeping in view of safety of commuters and other road users besides preserving prima agricultural land which is a precious possession in land-locked hilly areas - Change in alignment in view of topography of area is pleaded to be most feasible alignment - Official respondents claim to have considered public representations and resolutions passed by public of area which did not favour construction of road involving prima agricultural land - Petition Is Dismissal.
JUDGMENT :
Rashid Ali Dar, J.
1. Through the medium of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-
Certiorari:
i. Quashing the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 23rd of December, 2016 and all orders passed in pursuance thereof.
Mandamus:
i. Not to pass issue and declaration or pass any final award and already issued not to act upon the same till the outcome of the ' writ petition.
ii. Directing the respondents to produce the entire records pertaining to the decision for construction of Hewagan Dhanmasta Road from the initial stage, the decisions taken and the procedure adopted for arriving at the decision including survey and the certificate of fitness of the hilly terrain for purposes of construction of the road along with.
iii. Directing the respondents to produce the detailed records of the acquisition proceedings undertaken before the issuance of the section 4(1) Notification dated 23.12.2016.
iv. Directing the respondents not to consider the issue as in public interest merely because the petitioners are lesser in number, but have the same rights as any other citizen who is entitled to a right to life, liberty and dignity whether living in a village, town or a city.
Prohibition:
i. Prohibiting the respondents from constructing the road through the lands of the petitioners or taking any decision ignoring the interest of the petitioners or without giving any further opportunity of being heard.
ii. Writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from constructing the road through agricultural land in violation of the standing orders and circulars issued by the Government from time to time.
2. The petitioners, who are ten in number, have challenged the Notification dated 23rd of December, 2016 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act by respondent No. 3 whereby the land/property has been proposed to be acquired for the construction of Hewagan-Dhanmasta road under PMGSY scheme. The facts projected in the petition, in brief, are:
(1) The petitioners who are residents of Revenue Village Dhanmasta Tehsil Pogal Paristan (Ukhral) District, Ramban, are dependent upon the small land holdings which they possess.
(2) The respondent No. 3 issued notification u/s. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act under No. Acq./PMGSY/16/525-34, dated 23.12.2016 notifying therein that the land mentioned therein is required for public purpose, namely, for construction of Hewagan Dhanmasta first 3.00 km under PMGSY at village Dhanmasta Tehsil Pogal Paristan District.
(3) The petitioner No. 1 got the knowledge of the issuance of the aforesaid Notification dated 23rd of December, 2016 through passersby and immediately efforts were made to find out whether any such Notification had been issued. In pursuance of the application filed under Right to Information Act, the Notification which was published in the newspaper was provided.
(4) Hewagan-Dhanmasta road was sanctioned under package No. JK04-101. Since the construction of road from Hewagan to Dhanmasta was causing damage to the property and residents of the area, the Collector Land Acquisition recommended the high level team to be constituted to explore the possibility of alternate take off point of the road. The respondents brought the issue to the knowledge of the concerned authorities, who instead of permitting the alternate take off point permitted the respondents to change the alignment. An application under Right to Information Act was filed on 4th of December, 2013 seeking certain information from Public Information Officer, office of Executive Engineer PMGSY, Division Banihal, District Ramban and in reply thereto, the respondents furnished the information that the proposal of the road was under process. It has further been pleaded that the primary object of PMGSY was providing the road connectivity which is only key component of Rural Development for promoting the access to economic and social services. The idea of rural connectivity is tha