By the Court.—Heard Sri Ritesh Khatri assisted by Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh for respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by Radha Soami Satsang (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Society’), a religious society registered with Registrar of Societies, at Jullundar under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1860”). Society purchased a piece of land measuring 4.53 acres in Khasra Nos. 733 to 742 from Malkhan Singh and Vikram Singh vide registered sale-deed dated 13th August, 1991. It further proposed to purchase another piece of land measuring 4.9110 acres in Khasra Nos. 730, 731, 732, 737, 743, 744, 745, 747 and 846 in Village Baraula, Tehsil Dadri, District Ghaziabad pursuant to agreements for sale dated 23.12.1991 and 29.1.1992.

3. Uttar Pradesh Legislature enacted U.P. Industrial Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1976”) and thereunder constituted an Industrial Development Authority, Ghaziabad named as “New Okhla Industrial Development Authority” (hereinafter referred to as “NOIDA”). Notifications dated 17th April,1978 and 18th May, 1978 under Act, 1976, were issued whereunder, besides others, land purchased and possessed by petitioner, stated above, was brought within authority of NOIDA. Subsequently by notification dated 11th July, 1989 village Baraula itself was brought within the authority of NOIDA.

4. For the purpose of planned industrial development in Ghaziabad, NOIDA intended to acquire certain land in various villages including village Baraula. On the requisition sent by NOIDA, State Government initiated proceedings for acquisition of land under provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act,1894). In furtherance of above, a notification dated 6.1.1992 under Section 4(1) of Act,1894 was published in Gazette dated 15.2.1992 and in daily newspaper “Amar Ujala”, Meerut on 1.2.1992. The State also invoked Section 17(1) & (4) of Act,1894 and dispensed with inquiry under Section 5A of said Act. This writ petition was filed initially challenging Notification dated 6.1.1992 published under Section 4(1) of Act, 1894 and this Court while entertaining the same, passed an interim order on 14th February, 1992 to the following effect:

“Sri Awasthi has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent No. 2. He prays for and is granted three weeks’ time to file counter-affidavit. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3. He also prays for and is granted a month’s time to file counter-affidavit. List this petition after expiry of the aforesaid period.

Meanwhile the petitioner shall not be dispossessed in pursuance of notification dated 6.1.1992 from the disputed plots. However, this order shall not preclude the respondents for taking further proceeding in the matter.”

5. Subsequently the writ petition was amended by inserting para 15A and amendment of relief clause. The amendment became necessary for reason that Notification dated 20.4.1992 under Section 6 of Act,1894 was also published in Gazette dated 11.7.1992. To assail the same para 15A was added and in prayer, relief in respect of Notification dated 20.4.1992 was also added.

6. State of U.P. filed counter-affidavit, pointing out that acquired land is an agricultural land and its nature and user cannot be changed by petitioner. It justified acquisition stating that for planned industrial development it was necessary and entire procedure followed by State is strictly in accordance with provisions of Act, 1894.

7. Rejoinder-affidavit was filed by petitioner in October, 1994 stating that possession of disputed land has not been taken by respondents in view of interim order passed by this Court and petitioner is contin