1. Land acquisition under Section 4(1), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Purchase of land post-notification — Claim for allotment of developed plots under State Land Policy. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
1995 Supreme(SC) 1153
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Allahabad High Court)
K Ramaswamy, K S Paripoornan
SNEH PRABHA (SMT) AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER, RESPONDENTS.
Civil Appeals No. 1869 of 1981
decided on November 15, 1995.
Important Points
A person who purchases land after the publication of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, does so at their own peril and is not entitled to benefits of a Land Policy reserved for original owners.
Subject
Land Acquisition - Land Policy
Act Referred
Headnote
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4 - Sale deed - Compensation payable for acquisition plus cost - State of Uttar Pradesh got published in State Gazette notification issued Section of Land Acquisition Act acquiring acres of land in for planned development by Improvement Trust - Appellant had purchased of land sale deed of land constituting a total extent of acres square yards from erstwhile owner land – Held, In this case though appellant had applied within time to avail of benefits of Land Policy and she was asked to deposit compensation received for land acquired Trust was not in know of fact that appellant had purchased land after the publication of Section notification - When appellant sought for execution of lease deed she was called upon to produce her title deed which when produced disclosed that she had purchased land after Section notification was published - In other words she fell into main part of general land policy and GO - Thereby there is no order passed in her favour to extend benefits of Land Policy nor was any agreement to lease land in her favour was entered into and registered although she purchased land after notification Section was published - It would thus be clear that appellant had not fulfilled all conditions mentioned in paragraph of GO– Appeal dismissed
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
A.K.SRIVASTAVA, DILIP TANDON, G.L.SANGHI, GIRISH CHANDRA, J.M.Khanna, K.S.Chauhan, M.K.ROY, O.P.RANA, P.H.Parekh, R.B.MISHRA, Shefali S.Fazi
A.K.SRIVASTAVA, DILIP TANDON, G.L.SANGHI, GIRISH CHANDRA, J.M.Khanna, K.S.Chauhan, M.K.ROY, O.P.RANA, P.H.Parekh, R.B.MISHRA, Shefali S.Fazi
Table of Contents
2. Whether a subsequent purchaser of acquired land is entitled to benefits under a Land Policy intended for original owners or under specific clarificatory government orders. (Para 4 )
3. Analysis of the effect of Section 4(1) notification on subsequent purchasers and the limited, clarificatory nature of government orders regarding allotment eligibility. (Para 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 )
4. A person purchasing land after publication of Section 4(1) notification does so at their own peril and is not entitled to alternative site benefits. (Para 5 )
5. Appeal dismissed; denial of benefits under the Land Policy upheld. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 )
6. What is the legal effect of purchasing land after the publication of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
A purchaser does so at their own peril. The notification serves as public notice that the land is needed for public purpose, and any subsequent alienation does not bind the Government or the beneficiary. (Para 5 )
7. Is a subsequent purchaser of acquired land entitled to the benefit of an alternative site or developed plots under a Land Policy?
No. Such benefits are generally reserved for the person who was the owner of the land on the date the Section 4(1) notification was published. (Para 5 )
8. Does the granting of a special benefit to a few individuals under a clarificatory order entitle others to the same benefit under Article 14?
No. The equality clause does not extend to perpetuate a wrong. If a benefit is wrongly given to a few in a special case, it does not create a right for others to claim the same. (Para 8 )
JUDGMENT
K. RAMASWAMY, J. -
CA No. 1869 of 1981
1. The State of Uttar Pradesh got published in the State Gazette the notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short "the Act") on 16-7-1960, acquiring 287 acres of land in Ghaziabad for planned development by the Improvement Trust, Ghaziabad (for short "the Trust"). The appellant had purchased 1.9 and 2.9 bighas of land under sale deed dated 15-3-1961 and 1.9, 2.4 and 1.6 bighas of land on 27-3-1961 constituting a total extent of 4 acres 3025 square yards from the erstwhile owner of the land. The State Government issued on 13-8-1962 what is known as "Land Policy" in which it was stated that the lands falling within the limits of Ghaziabad Municipality may be acquired in the first instance, under the Act; that the Trust should make external development of the entire area and also internal development in certain categories of cases the details whereof are mentioned in the Schedule appended thereto and directed that
"lease out the plotted area to the persons from whom the land was acquired by charging premium which shall be equal to the compensation payable for the acquisition plus the cost of both external and internal development. The lessee may be given the right to sub-lease the plot and thereby earn profits on their lands."
They divided the landowners into three categories, viz., (1) those who held an area of less than 2 acres of land, (2) those who held an area of more than 2 acres but less than 20 acres of land and (3) those who held an area of 20 or more acres of land, at one place. In paragraph 6 it was stated that
"those in Category No. (2) may be given an option either to accept cash compensation for their land under the Land Acquisition Act or to get back 40% of their land as developed plotted area after paying the cost of external and internal development. In the latter case, the premium will be compensation payable for the land."
2. In furtherance thereof, the appellant had applied on 10-5-1963 for allotment of the plot and also got herself registered with the Trust on 25-11-1968 seeking allotment of the land under the Land Policy. The appellant also, after being informed of her need to redeposit the compensation amount she received from the Land Acquisition Officer on 12-9-1969 and deposited the same with the Trust on 31-7-1970. The appellant claimed that she was allotted 7957 square yards of land in Sector 12, viz., Chander Nagar but when she sought registration of the lease deed in her favour on 27-6-1972 she was informed to supply a copy of the sale deed of the land purchased by her vide communication dated 18-4-1974. By letter dated 6-5-1974, the Trust informed her that since she had purchased the land after notification under Section 4(1) had already been published, she was not eligible for allotment and accordingly the Trust had been returned the amount deposited by her by a cheque dated 3-6-1974. Thereafter, the appellant filed Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 4517 of 1974 in the Allahabad High Court which was dismissed on 29-11-1977.
3. When the matter was heard on 29-8-1995 by this Court, it transpired that after the policy was issued, the State Government issued two GOs dated 8-12-1971 and 2-6-1972 providing guidelines for implementation of the Land Policy. We, therefore, directed the counsel for the State as well as the Trust to produce the copies of the orders. Accordingly, they came to be filed. GO No. 342 dated 8-12-1971 addressed by the Deputy Secretary to the Trust indicates in paragraph 2 that the persons who had purchased the land which would fall under the notification, after the publication of the notification for the acquisition of land under the Act, may not be given any benefit under the Land Policy. Paragraph 3 provides that the benefit of the Land Policy may also not be given to the persons who although had submitted their applications for the benefits under the Land Policy well before the prescribed date
