UNION OF INDIA Vs. SHAKUNTALA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent claims to be the owner of premises known as Grand Hotel which is situated at 2, Under Hill Road, Delhi. On 3rd April, 1980, a portion of the premises had been requisitioned by the petitioners under the Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The 1952 Act lapsed on 10th March, 1987. On 6th March, 1987 a notification was issued under S. 4 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') which reads as follows :

(2.) The notification goes on to list 14 properties under the heading 'Specification' to which the notification would apply. Apart from the description, the purpose of acquisition in respect of each of the properties specified has been set out in a separate column. Against item 7 of the Specification, 11.740 Sq. meters of 2, Under Hill Road, Delhi (referred to hereafter as the 'premises') has been mentioned, and the purpose of acquisition stated is "Housing the Government Office". A notification under S.6 of the Act was issued in respect of all fourteen properties on 10th March, 1987.

(3.) The respondent challenged the notification issued under S. 4 as well as the declaration under S. 6 of the Act under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court at Delhi. The owner of one of the premises similarly specified in the impugned notifications, namely Banwari Lal and Sons Pvt. Ltd., (Banwari Lal) also filed a writ application in the High Court impugning the notifications inter alia on the ground that there was no urgency which justified the Governor to dispense with the right of the owner to object under S. 5A of the Act. Banwari Lal's writ application was allowed on 4th February, 1991 and the impugned notifications were quashed. The High Court upheld the several contentions of Banwari Lal including the issue of urgency1. The Division Bench of the High Court set aside the acquisition proceedings on three bases :