The court upheld the legality of land acquisition notifications while rejecting claims against compensation assessments, emphasizing public purpose over individual land rights.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.

Since both the writ petition(s) arise from common theretos notification(s) issued under Section 4 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (hereinafter for short called as the 'Act of 1894'), besides also arise from common thereto declaration(s) issued under Section 6 of the 'Act of 1894'. Therefore, both the writ petition(s) are amenable for becoming decided through a common verdict.

2. The present petitioner(s) claim the hereinafter extracted reliefs.

Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for quashing:

a) Notification issued under section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 23.1.2004 and dated 18.1.2005.

And

b) For Declaration that section 23(1) 1st of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 is ultravirus of Article 31-A, 2nd Proviso, because, the said Act does not provide the fixing of compensation, at no less than market price", as on the date of acquisition.

And for declaration

c) That in view of the 73rd and 74th Amendment of the Constitution of India, Chapter IX and IXA have been added and special provisions are made for Municipalities and Panchayats. For such areas the development can only be done by the Committees for District Planning under Article 243ZD & 243ZF of the Constitution of India and PUDA has no jurisdiction to carry on the planning at Municipal and Panchayat level.

And for declaration

d) That the provisions of Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act. 1995 Act are violated by not complying with the provisions of Chapter VII, IX, X, XI and XII. the proceedings for acquisition had been started.

And for declaration

e) That Section 3, 4, 14, 17 and 28 of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995, are ultravirus of Article 243ZD and 243ZF of the Constitution of India.

And for declaration

f) That the area within the "Phirni" cannot be acquired in accordance with the Policy of the Government dated 20.1.2006.

And for declaration

g) That the Secretary of the Department does not have the power to change the policy of Punjab Regional and Town Planning & Development Act, 1995, by passing an exemption order under Section 178 of the said Act. If the policy is to be changed, then it is function of the legislature or in the alternative the Cabinet. But, in no case, the Secretary has the power to do so. The expression "State Government" used in Section 178 of 1995 Act means that the decision lies with the Cabinet only and not with the Secretary of the department. Even otherwise, the exemption order dated 13.2.2004 is without jurisdiction, based on extraneous considerations and irrelevant material and is thus void.

And for declaration

That the notice under section 12(2) and 31(1) of 1894 Act (Annexure P-7) be declared void and illegal; being in violation of the policy of the State Government that land within phirni/ lal lakir