P.M.CHAUHAN - (1.) Petitioners the occupants of several survey numbers of the agricultural lands situated at village Ichhapore taluke Choryasi District Surat have challenged the acquisition of their lands for the public purpose the extension of the township for the employees of the Krishak Bharti Co-operative Limited (hereinafter referred to as KRIBHCO) a project for the production of fertilizers viz. Ammonia Urea etc. The share capital of the Government of India in the said project is 340 crores out of the total cost of the project estimated over Rs. 980 crores. Notification No. AM/83/132/M/JST/1683/484/GH dated 16/03/1983 was issued under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Notification No. AM/83/466/44/JSN/1683/484/GH dated 19/09/1983 was issued by the State Government under S. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and urgency clause under S.17 of the Land Acquisition Act was also supplied for the acquisition of various survey numbers for the said public purpose. The Notification under S. 4 was challenged by the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 2035 but was subsequently withdrawn. The acquisition is challenged by the petitioners mainly on the grounds that the acquired lands are very fertile agricultural lands and are placed in the agricultural zone by Surat Urban Development Authority which prepared the Development Plan under S. 6 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976 (hereinafter referred to as T.P. Act) and the said lands can only be used for the purpose for which they are demarcated; that the KRIBHCO had in the year 1978 proposed to establish a plant near Hajira near Vihardham Surat which is popularly known as Hajira Fertilizers Complex for which purpose the Union Government had appointed an Expert Team which alongwith the members of the World Bank Team visited the site and the Members of the Gujarat Pollution Board also visited and ultimately it was announced that for the project KRIBHCO would require about 1000 to 1100 acres of land and in spite of that 1314 acres 24 gunthas of land of village Limla and 467 acres 25 gunthas of village Kavas is acquired and therefore the land acquired is not required for public purpose; that when representation was made in the year 1978 when the proposals for acquisition of the land for the project were being considered the Minister of Revenue by letter dated 22/11/1978 had informed Mohanbhai Jagdishbhai Patel that the State Government intended to acquire only fallow land which is not cultivable and no fertile land would be acquired. The then Chairman of KRIBHCO also informed Shri Mohanbhai Jagdishbhai Patel that as far as possible the land belonging to the State Government would be acquired and accordingly in 1978 the lands of village Ichhapore being very fertile were not acquired for the project; that the policy of the State Government is not to acquire fertile land and the lands of the petitioners being fertile agricultural lands should not have-been acquired; that the survey number 174-A which is contiguous to S.No. 195 which is already acquired of Mora village is Government fallow land and if at all the Government is genuinely satisfied of the need of KRIBHCO that land can be allotted to the acquiring body; that the KRIBHCO does not require the land as there is no real ganuine and bonafide need for any public purpose as it is in possession of large area of lands which is in excess of requirement of the project and therefore the exercise of. the power by the State Government for the purpose of KRIBHCO is colourable exercise of powers and is fraud on the statute and that if at all the KRIBHCO is in real genuine and bonafide need of the lands the contiguous lands of village Kavas are also available for that purpose and similarly Survey Numbers 435 and 255 fallow Govt. lands of village Damka are also available and could have been acquired for the aforesaid purpose; that in the Notification issued under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act it is mentioned that the lands are likely to be needed for Hajira Fertilizer Complex Township and that purpose is neither a public purpose nor the KRIBHCO require the lands genuinely and therefore the notification is illegal ultravires void in colourable exercise of power and fraud on the statute; that the central Government and the State Government had examined the entire issue and was of the view that the fertile lands of Ichhapore village should not be acquired and relying upon the said promise the petitioners spent considerable amount for making the lands more fertile and therefore on the principle of promissory estoppel the respondent no. 1 is estopped from acquiring the said lands; that the survey no. 702 belongs to public trust and should not have been acquired as it will offend the religious feelings of agriculturists of Ichhapore village especially when the mosque building was not acquired while acquiring the lands of Limla village for the said project; that the report of the inquiry under S. 5 was submitted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to the State Government and the State Government after that issued Notification under S. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 19/09/1983 and also applied the urgency clause under S. 17 of the Land Acquisition Act and by notice dated 28/09/1983 under sub-S. (1) of S. 9 of the Land Acquisition Act directed that possession be taken on 25/10/1983 Accordingly the notification under S. 6 and invoking of urgency clause under S. 17 of the Act are arbitrary unjust and void and that the Notification under S. 6 suffers from the vice of non-application of mind and colourable exercise of power. Even though the above referred contentions were raised in the petition Mr. G. N. Desai and Mr. P. G. Desai learned Counsels for the petitioners urged some of the contentions which we will discuss at the later stage.
(2.) The petition was filed by 21 petitioners but subsequently 13 of the petitioners withdrew probably because of the compromise with KRIBHCO and they agreed for the acquisition of their respective lands and only 8 petitioners have challenged the acquisition of their lands. Original petitioners Nos. 1 4 7 8 9 11 13 15 and 17 to 21 who were occupants of the lands bearing S.Nos. 706 716 699 698 694 691 702 698 704 715 735 705 716 and 716 respectively holding about 9 hactares 8 are 82 sq.mts. out of 17 hectares 21 acre 89 Sq. Mts. land under acquisition have withdrawn from the challenge and have agreed for the acquisition. The original petitioners Nos. 2 3 5 6 10 12 14 and 16 who have challenged the acquisition are occupants of respective survey numbers 693 700 and 701/5-6 617 733 701 and 701 692 698 697 and 703.
(3.) The petitioners joined KRIBHCO as respondent no. 3 but subsequently by Civil Application No. 367 after about a period of 6 years after filing of the petition at the time of hearing of the petition sought to delete it as a party respondent and this Court by order dated 5/04/1989 allowed KRIBHCO to be deleted as party respondent.;