Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
M. Katju, Rakesh Tiwari
MANVEER SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 43250 Of 2000
Decided On : 10/09/2002
Land Acquisition - Challenge to notification under Land Acquisition Act - Section 4 (1), Section 6/17 - Land Acquisition Act
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the notification under Section 4 (1) and Section 6/17 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring their land for the construction of a market yard for Mandi Samiti, Khurja. The petitioners claimed to be the owners of the land and alleged that it was used as abadi land with constructions on it.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the acquisition for the market yard of Mandi Samiti was for a public purpose and there was urgency as stated in the counter affidavit. The Court held that it cannot go into the question of whether the purpose for which the land was needed was a public purpose or not.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the notifications under Section 4 (1) and Section 6/17 of the Land Acquisition Act, the nature of the land, and the public purpose of the acquisition.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on various decisions to establish that unless there was a colorable exercise of power, it cannot go behind the declaration of the Government to determine the public purpose. It also emphasized that even if there were superstructures on the land, they cannot be exempted from acquisition for planned development, and the declaration of the State Government under Section 6 (3) is conclusive evidence of the land being needed for a public purpose.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the Court found no merit in the challenge to the notifications under the Land Acquisition Act.
( 1 ) THIS writ petition alongwith connected writ petition No. 3301 of 2001 are being disposed of by a common judgment. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
( 2 ) THE petitoners has challenged the impugned notification dated 21-11-1996 published by public notice dated 24-8-1999 under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act and the notification dated 23-8-2000 published through public notice dated 23-8-2000 under Section 6/17 of the Land Acquisition Act vide Annexures 7 and 10 to the writ petition. The petitioners have also prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent not to proceed in the matter of acquisition proceedings and not to demolish the constructions on the land in dispute.
( 3 ) THE petitioner No. 1 claims to be owner of plot No. 30 and the petitioner No. 2 of plot No. 31 in village Wajidpur, paragana and Tahsil Khurja, District Bulandshahr. It is alleged in paragraph 3 of the wirt petition that the said land has been used by the petitioners as abadi land. The khasra entires are Annexures 1 and 2 the writ petition. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition it is alleged that the petitioners have raised constructions over the said land and then sought permission to change the nature of the land under Section 143 of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act. On the application of the petitioner the S. D. M. ,. Khurja after receiving report of the Tahsildar and other officers of the revenue department passed an order dated 12-8-1999 declaring the land as abadi land. True copies of the orders in this connection are Annexures 3 and 4 to the writ petition. After declaration of the land as abadi land they were recorded as such in the revenue record vide Annexures 5 and 6.
( 4 ) IN paragraph 7 of the writ petition it is alleged that the State Government issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 21-11-1996 alleged to have been published on 21-11-1996 and also in two daily newspapers, rashtriya Sahara and dainik Jagaran on 21-12-1996 and 5-8-1998 and the said declaration has been mentioned in the public notice dated 24-8-1999 and notification was issued under Section 4/17 of the Act through the aforesaid notice. True copy of the public notice is Annexure 7 to the writ petition. The said notice/declaration dated 24-8-1999 states that the land is sought to be acquired for construction of a market yard for Mandi Samiti, Khurja.
( 5 ) IN paragraph 9 of the writ petition it is alleged that according to the public notice dated 24-8-1999 it has been declared that the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition act was notified on 21-11-1996 which was published in the gazette dated 21-11-1996 and thereafter published in two newspapers on 21-12-1996 and thereafter on 5-4-1998. However, the public notice has been made only on 24-8-1999 and hence it is alleged that there was no urgency for dispensing with Section 5-A of the Act. It is also alleged that there was no public purpose for the acquisition.
( 6 ) IN paragraph 11 of the writ petition it is alleged that the petitioners made representation to the Director, Land Acquisition on 28-9-1999 stating that there were constructions over the land in question which is abadi land. True copy of the representation is Annexure 8 to the writ petition. In paragraph 12 of the writ petition it is alleged that on the representation of the petitioner, the Director, Land Acquisition sought a report from the Collector with regard to the site and nature of the plots. The revenue authorities made an inspection and sumbitted a report on 24-2-2000 in respect of the said plots and other plots. In this report it has been mentioned that the said plots are abadi. True copy of the report is Annexure 9 to the writ petition. In paragraph 13 of the writ petition it is alleged that the some other plots can be acquired instead of the plots of the petitioners.
( 7 ) IN paragraph 14 of the writ petition it is alleged that despite the report of the revenue authorities the Collector,
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
