SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(All) 537

[2008(3) ADJ 289 (DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SUNIL AMBWANI AND S.U. KHAN, JJ.
SUDHIR CHANDRA AGARWALA .......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS .........Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69534 of 2006, decided on 29th February, 2008)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Ravi Kant for the Petitioner; Pradeep Kumar and Zafar Naiyer, Addl. Advocate General for the Respondents.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 4, 5-A, 6 and 17(4)—Evidence Act, 1872—Section 115—Land Acquisition—Question of applicability of estoppel—Petitioner sought permission for construction of boundary wall in his land from NOIDA authority in May, 2001—He was informed just after 12 days that his land is proposed to be acquired for planned industrial development—In spite of it, he gave unconditional undertaking that he will not insist for claim even if his land is acquired—This undertaking would not amount to waiver of his right to challenge acquisition of land, if made not in accordance with law—Acquisition process started in April, 2006, invoking urgency provisions—Petitioner’s right to challenge it—Not waived—Waiver involves conscious, voluntary and intentional relinquishment or abandonment of known existing legal right, advantage, benefit, claim or privilege—Petitioner by his undertaking did not give up only of his rights in year 2001, which he did not have existing in year 2001. [Paras 16, 17 and 28]

       (B) Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 4, 5-A, 6, 17(1) and 17(4)—Land Acquisition—Invoking urgency provisions of Sections 5-A, 17(1) and 17(4)—Validity of—Land of petitioner was acquired for planned industrial development—Proposal for acquisition—Considered by State Government which expressed its satisfaction—It was found that only petitioner and one other person has challenged acquisition proceedings—High Court clarifying requirement of giving hearing to persons whose land is being acquired—Found that land in question was required for setting up several industries—In such cases, judicial review is not permissible by High Court—State has given sufficient materials to support invokement of urgency provisions and on formation of subjective satisfaction of State Government that acquisition is required for public purpose of planned industrial development—As such, acquisition is valid. [Paras 18 to 20, 22 to 24, 26 and 28]

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—The petitioner is a Senior Advocate practicing in Supreme Court of India. By this writ petition he is enforcing his legal and constitutional rights under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, to quash the acquisition of large area of land (373.218 hectrs.) by the Government of Uttar Pradesh for Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA), including a farm house purchased by him in Khasra Plot No. 160 (area 0.7830 hectrs. equivalent to 3 bigha 1 biswa and 80 biswansis) in Village Tushiana, Pargana & Tehsil Dadri, Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar. He is recorded as tenure holder of the land in Khatauni (records of title) of the year 1409-1414F. (2002-2007 A.D.). The challenge to the powers of ‘eminent domain’ by the State is on the grounds that there was no public purpose and in fact no need at all for acquisition of the land. The invocation of urgency clause in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5A and under Section 17 (4) of the Act, in the proposal to acquire the land under Section 4 of the Act was mechanical exercise of executive power without application of mind, to the need to dispense with the right of hearing given to the affected persons under Section 5-A of the Act.

2. The petitioner has raised constructions in small portion of the land surrounded by 8 high boundary wall. He has constructed a pump house and store, and has planted ornamental flowers and fruit bearing trees. He is living in House No. 355, Sector 15-A, NOIDA and is using the property for pleasure. He was informed by the Town Planner of GNIDA in the letter dated 10.10.2001 allowing his application dated 15.9.2001 for construction of boundary wall; temporary construction of pump house and store that if the land is acquired, he will not be entitled to any compensation for these constructions.

3. The notification under Section 4 (1) read with Section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act (in short the Act) was published by the State Government on 10.4.2006 proposing acquisition of large number of plots in Village Tushiana, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar with total area of 379.001 hectrs. including the petitioner’s plot No. 160 (area 0.7830 hects.) for “planned industrial development”. In para 2 of the notification dated 10.4.2006 the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, expressed its opinion :

“The Governor, being of the opinion that the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act, are applicable to said land inasmuch as the said land is urgently required, for the planned industrial development in district Gautam Budh Nagar through Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and it is as well necessary to eliminate the delay likely to be caused by an inquiry under Section 5A of the said Act, the Governor is further pleased to direct under sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the said Act that the provision of Section 5A of the said Act shall not apply.”

4. The notification under Section 6 read with Section 17 (1) of the Act acquiring the land, following the notification under Section 4 of the Act proposing to acquire the land in public purpose, was made on 30th November, 2006 acquiring 373.218 hectrs. of land out of 379.001 hectrs. proposed to be acquired. By this notification the Governor of U.P. declared :

“NOTIFICATION

No. 6330/77-4-06-133N/05

Lucknow : Dated 30th November, 2006

In continuation of Government notification No. 6486/77-4-2005-133N/05, Dated 10th April, 2006 issued under subsection (1) of section 4 and sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act No. 1 of 1894) and lastly published by giving public notice on 26.4.2006 the Governor is pleased to declare under Section 6 of the said Act that he is satisfied that the land mentioned in the Schedule below is needed for a public purpose, namely for the planned industrial development in District Gautam Budh Nagar through Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and under Secti














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top