Back
2003 Supreme(MP) 332
High Court of Madhya Pradesh
A.K. Mishra, J.
Gulabi Nagar Griha Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit and others
v.
State of M.P. and others
Miscellaneous Petition No. 1663 of 1990
Decided on 2.3.2003
A.G. Dhande with Saurabh Tiwari for petitioners;
Ashok Agarwal, Panel Lawyer for respondents
Headnote:(1) Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 -- Ss. 20 and 42 -- no order exempting land under S. 20 passed -- provisions under S. 42 not applicable. [Paras 10 & 12]
(2) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 -- S.4 -- acquisition of land -- challenge to -- cannot be permitted on the ground that acquisition is for different purpose than one shown in master plan -- acquisition of land to be seen under Land Acquisition Act only. AIR 1996 SC 671 followed. [Para 11]
(3) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 -- Ss.17, 4 and 6 -- acquisition of land for housing purpose -- is an urgent and national need -- it is also for public purpose -- Court cannot sit over the satisfaction of authority -- it is also protected as regularity of official act --satisfaction can be justified if appears from the record. AIR 1999 SC 436, AIR 1977 SC 183, AIR 1968 SC 870 and (2000) 7 SCC 296 followed. AIR 1991 MP 72 and AIR 1995 P & H 62 relied on. [Para 13]
(4) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 -- Ss.4, 6 and 17 -- Transfer of Property Act, 1882 -- S. 54 -- holder of agreement to sell -- cannot challenge acquisition of land -- he has no title to raise such objection as he is not person aggrieved. 1992 All. CJ 1248 relied on. 1996 AIR SCW 743 followed. [Para 15]
(5) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 -- Ss. 4 and 6 -- land belonging to Cooperative Society -- can be acquired under the Act. AIR 1988 SC 1 followed. [Para 15]
¼1½ uxj Hkwfe ¼vf/kdre lhek vkSj fofu;eu½ vf/kfu;e] 1976 && /kkjk 20 rFkk 42 && /kkjk 20 ds v/khu NwV dk vkns‘k ikfjr ugha&& /kkjk 42 ds v/khu mica/k ykxw ughaA
¼iSjk 10 ,oa 12½
¼2½ Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 && /kkjk 4 && Hkwfe dk vtZu && vk{ksi && bl vk/kkj ij vuqKkr ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd vtZu] ekLVj Iyku esa nf‘kZr iz;kstu ls fHkUu iz;kstu ds fy, gS && Hkwfe ds vtZu dsoy Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e ds v/khu fopkj fd;k tkuk gksxkA , vkb vkj 1996 ,l lh 671 vuqlfjrA
¼iSjk 11½
¼3½ Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 && /kkjk 17] 4 rFkk 6 && Hkwfe dk vtZu x`g fuekZ.k ds iz;kstu ds fy, && ;g vR;ko‘;d vkSj jk"Vªh; vko‘;drk gS&& ;g yksd iz;kstu ds fy, Hkh gS && U;k;ky;] izkf/kdkjh ds lek/kku ij fopkj ugha dj ldrk && bls ‘kkldh; d`R; dh fu;ferrk dh Hkkafr Hkh laj{k.k izkIr gS && lek/kku U;k;ksfpr gS ;fn og vfHkys[k ij ls ifjyf{kr gksrk gSA , vkb vkj 1999 ,l lh 436] , vkb vkj 1977 ,l lh 183] , vkb vkj 1968 ,l lh 870 rFkk ¼2000½ 7 ,l lh 296 vuqlfjrA , vkb vkj 1991 e-iz- 72 rFkk , vkb vkj 1995 iatkc vkSj gfj;k.kk 62 voyafcrA
¼iSjk 13½
¼4½ Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 && /kkjk 4] 6 rFkk 17 && laifRr varj.k vf/kfu;e] 1882&& /kkjk 54 && fodz; djkj dk /kkjd && Hkwfe ds vtZu ij vk{ksi ugha dj ldrk && ,slk vk{ksi djus dk mls gd ugha gSa D;ksafd og O;fFkr O;fDr ugha gSA 1992 byk- lh ts 1248 voyafcrA 1996 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 743 vuqlfjrA
¼iSjk 15½
¼5½ Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 && /kkjk 4 rFkk 6 && lgdkjh lkslkbVh dh Hkwfe && vf/kfu;e ds v/khu vftZr dh tk ldrh gSA , vkb vkj 1988 ,l lh 1 vuqlfjrA
¼iSjk 15½
1. Petitioner in this writ petition are assailing the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the Land Acquisition Officer for the purpose of construction of houses for M.P. Housing Board.
2. It is averred in the petition that petitioner No. 1 Gulabi Nagar Griha Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit is a Housing Society and has entered into an agreement to purchase the land from petitioners 2 to 5 on 21.8.1986. Notification under section 4 was published in the MP Gazette dated 27.1.1989 and declaration under section 6 was published in MP Gazette dated 27.10.1989 under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Petitioner No. 1 entered in agreement Annexure D dated 21.8.1986 to purchase the land, petitioner No. 1-Society is formed with a view to provide houses to the poor persons.
3. It is further submitted by the petitioner that proceedings under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 were initiated against holders, certain land was declared surplus. The holders have prayed for exemption under section 20 of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act. The provision of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act reveals that Act is having the overriding effect as provided under sectionA2 of the Act. The land belonging to petitioners 2 to 5 ought to have been exempted and matter is pending before the State Government for final decision for grant of exemption under section 20. Though the land was declared surplus but no final statement has been issued under section 9 of the Urban Land Ceiling Act.
4. Petitioner further submits that invocation of section 17 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and dispensing with the enquiry under section 5A is bad in law, after six months of issuance of notification under section 4, declaration under section 6 was issued, earlier acquisition of these lands was withdrawn as per order dated 5.3.1988, thereafter the permission was given on 26.11.1988 to invoke the provisions of section 17 (1) of the Act. The petitioner is challenging the invocation of section 17, mind has not been applied as required under section 17 (4) and Government has granted exemption to other holders under section 20, exemption ought to have been granted in case of petitioners also. It is further submitted that purpose of the petitioner No. 1-Society is also to provide the houses to the members of the society, by not deciding the application for exemption under section 20 of Urban Land Ceiling Act the respondents have acted arbitrarily, double standards have been applied, same yardsticks have not been followed.
5. In the return filed on behalf of respondents it is pointed out that they have adopted the return filed in MP No.1708/90, an additional return has been filed for the specific purpose of present writ petition. In the return filed in MP No.1708/90, it is pointed out that land was declared surplus and petitioner No.2 had no authority to enter in any agreement to transfer the property to petitioner No.1 as such the entire petition is frivolous and not maintainable. Petitioner-Society has no locus standi to challenge the land acquisition proceedings. Land is required for the public purpose by the Housing Board to provide houses as per the scheme of the Housing Board, 60% of the houses are reserved for economically weaker sections and shelterless people. Element of public utility in the scheme is involved. Housing is an urgent need as such invocation of urgency clause is proper, enquiry under section 5A has been rightly dispensed with. Petitioner is bound by the outcome of the Urban Land Ceiling proceedings, acquisition of land has been properly made no interference is required.
6. Shri A.G. Dhande, learned senior counsel appearing for petitioners has submitted that since proceedings were earlior initiated and it was decided not to invoke urgency clause as reflected in order dated 5.3.1988, later grant of permission to invoke urgency clause is bad in law. His further submission is that section 42 of the Urban
