IMPORTANT POINT
The procedural requirements under the Land Acquisition Act must be strictly followed; failure to do so invalidates the acquisition process.

ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)

Mr. P. Sri Raghu Ram, learned Senior Counsel represents Mr. P. Sri Ram, learned counsel for petitioners.

Mr. Mohd. Imran Khan, learned Additional Advocate General appears for the State.

2. In this Writ Petition, the petitioners inter alia have sought for a declaration that the action of the respondents for acquisition of the lands of the petitioners for establishing Information Technology Park for the benefit of respondent No.4 as arbitrary, illegal and mala fide and to forbear the respondent authorities from proceeding with the acquisition of lands.

3. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition briefly stated are that the petitioners are owners of land bearing Survey Nos.127 to 173 and Survey Nos.262 to 268 situate at Gopannapally Village, Serilingampalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The aforesaid land along with other lands was required by respondent No.4 for purposes of establishment of Information Technology Park and allied projects.

4. Thereupon, the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on 03.03.2005 which was published in the Gazette on 04.03.2005. The notification dated 03.03.2005 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act was received in the Office of the Tahsildar on 18.03.2005 for issuing public notice. The Land Acquisition Officer on 10.03.2005 issued a notice in Form 3 under Section 5A of the Act by which the objections were invited up to 04.04.2005.

5. The notices for enquiry under Section 5A of the Act were served on the petitioners on 28.03.2005 pursuant to which the petitioners have submitted objections on 04.04.2005. The Special Deputy Collector thereafter submitted a report on 08.04.2005 and a draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 16.04.2005 which was published in the Gazette on 16.04.2005. Thereupon, the petitioners have filed this Writ Petition seeking the reliefs as aforesaid.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that Section 4(1) of the Act requires the appropriate Government to issue a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and to publish the same in the Gazette. In addition, the appropriate Government is also under obligation to get the notification published in two daily newspapers having circulation in the locality and is required to give public notice of substance of the notification at convenient places. It is further submitted that until and unless the action under Section 4(1) of the Act is complete, the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Act cannot be invoked. It is submitted that in the instant case, even though the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 03.03.2005, the same was published in the Gazette on 04.03.2005, prior to completion of the steps required to be taken under Section 4(1) of the Act. A survey was already conducted on 18.02.2005 even prior to publication of notice under Section 4(1) of the Act. It is also submitted that the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was received for publication in the Office of the Tahsildar on 18.03.2005 and therefore, the petitioners ought to have been given 30 days time from 18.03.2005 to submit their objections. It is therefore contended that the notification under Section 4(1), 4(2) as well as Section 5A and draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act are liable to be quashed. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on the decisions of Supreme Court in Khub Chand and others v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1967 SC 1074 and Narendrajit Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others, AIR 1971 SC 306.

7. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by a common order dated 13.02.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.8293 of 2005 and batch and order dated 07.02.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.10163 of 2005.

8. It is further submitted that the respondents shall carry out f