SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Ori) 717

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
V. Gopala Gowda, B.P. Das, JJ.
RAJIV PUJARI AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Writ Petition (C) Nos. 11607 of 2007, 7163, 7278, 7279, 7360, 8636, 10325 and 12948 of 2008 and 6863 of 2009
Decided On : 16-11-2010

JUDGMENT :

V. Gopala Gowda, C.J. - These petitions have been filed by the owners of the land acquired by the State Government in favour of the opposite party Anil Agarwal Foundation (hereinafter in short called as 'Foundation') for establishment of a University in exercise of its eminent domain power under the provisions of Part-VII of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as the 'L.A. Act' in short). The public interest litigation petitions have been filed both on behalf of the land owners who have no access to justice and also on behalf of the public of the locality of the lands whose public interest is affected by violating Rule of Law in acquiring vast tract of both Government, Temple and private lands in favour of the Foundation. They were listed and heard together by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties and are disposed of by this common judgment. With a view to avoid repetition of pleadings and rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties, we would briefly state the necessary facts and advert to the pleadings and legal submissions made on behalf of the parties while answering the points that are framed in these cases.

2. The facts stated in all these writ petitions are almost the same and the impugned notifications have been challenged on identical grounds. It is therefore not necessary to refer to the facts of all the writ petitions. We have therefore, referred to the facts of W.P.(c) No. 7163 of 2008 & W.P.(C) No. 10325 of 2008.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case are that on 23.6.2006 one Mohit Kumar Rana, Principal, A.T. Kearney Limited filed an application before the State Government stating that M/s. Vedanta Resources Limited is contemplating to set up a University in Orissa to impart education in under-graduate and post-graduate courses in Engineering, Medicine, Management, General Science and Humanities etc. It was further stated in the application that the Group had given a presentation to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Orissa during April, 2006. Their team after visiting different sites in Orissa have selected a site on the outskirt of Puri on the Puri-Konark marine drive to be the place ideal for establishment of the University. Therefore, it was, inter alia, prayed that Government of Orissa should make available 15,000 acres of contiguous land around Nuanai, in the district of Puri in Bhubaneswar-Puri-Konark marine drive. It was further prayed that the Government of Orissa should coordinate the land acquisition process by appointment of a Special Land Acquisition Officer. The Group prayed that they require 1500 acres of land for Phase-I to be acquired by September, 2006 and the balance by December, 2006. Thereafter, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Government of Orissa and Vedanta Foundation on 19.7.2006 and Government of Orissa confirmed the availability of contiguous land of about 8000 acres and to make endeavour to provide an additional contiguous land and other facilities as required by the Foundation. It is the case of the petitioners that a Private Limited Company incorporated in the name and style of Sterlite Foundation changed its name to Vedanta Foundation u/s 25 of the Companies Act of 1956 and accordingly fresh certificate of incorporation consequent on change of name was issued in July, 2004. After signing of the MOU, necessary steps were taken by the State Government for allotment of the land to the Foundation and the Vice President of the Vedanta Foundation was directed to deposit 20% of the estimated investment cost which was subsequently reduced to 10% without any basis and reasoning and necessary direction was issued to the Collector, Puri to obtain administrative approval of the project from the Higher Education Department and to produce the approval along with the proposal before the Government. In the meantime the opinion of the Law Department was sought on the questions (a) whether the Foundation is an educational founda

























































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top