(1.) Petitioners, who are land-owners and are residents of Village Bujbuja and Dokaria situated in Gram Post Dokaria, District Vijayraghavgarh, District Katni, have filed this writ petition challenging the acquisition of land being undertaken by respondent No.4, for the purpose of setting up a 660x3 Mega Watt Thermal Power Station in the District of Katni. Particulars of the land held by the petitioners and other details are mentioned in the body of the petition and, therefore, it is not reproduced in this order.
(2.) Shri Vivek Rusia, learned counsel for the petitioner, took me through the memorandum of agreement entered into initially between the State Government and the Company in question; the letter Annexure P/2 written by the Company to the Collector, Katni seeking allocation of land, by pointing out that efforts to purchase the land from the land owners have not yielded fruitful result; thereafter he referred to the report submitted by the Company; action taken by the Revenue Authorities and the SDO; and, the final report prepared by the Collector and emphasized that merely on the basis of the report submitted by the Company, without conducting any proper inquiry, without application of mind, in a very casual manner the verbatim report submitted by the Company is considered by the Revenue Authorities and finally by the Collector and in a mechanical manner the permission is granted. Accordingly contending that no proper inquiry in the matter is conducted as required under section 5-A of the Act or under section 40 of the Land Acquisition Act, Shri Rusia submits that the action taken in the manner in a mechanical way by the Collector is unsustainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter took me through the provisions of Section 4, Section 5-A; and, section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, and submitted that without conducting any inquiry and without deciding the objection of the aggrieved persons under section 5-A directly the Notification is issued under section 6, without following the procedure contemplated under section 5-A. By taking me through various documents, it was tried to be emphasized by Shri Rusia, vehemently that the entire statutory procedure contemplated under section 5-A has been given a go-by and the action is taken without complying with the requirement of section 5- A. That apart, it is stated that no public purpose is involved in the matter of acquisition. Referring to the definition of 'public purpose' as contained in section 3(f) and the agreement in question, wherein liberty is granted to the Company to sell the electricity and only 5% of the power generated is to be used for government purpose, learned counsel argued that the requirement of law has not been complied with.
(3.) That apart, it is pointed out by Shri Vivek Rusia that respondents in the return have stated that action is taken under Chapter VII of the Land Acquisition Act, but the procedure contemplated under Chapter VII has not been followed. Accordingly, it is his case that the entire action taken in the matter is not proper, without application of mind and without taking note of the requirement of law, particularly the requirement of section 5-A, therefore, the entire action taken is unsustainable.