- (1.)Leave granted. The interlocutory applications are allowed.
(2.)These appeals arise out of the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the State of U.P. under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short 'the Act']. By the impugned judgment, the High Court quashed the two notifications Dated 25th June, 2004 and 20th February, 2007 under Section 6 of the Act and partly quashed notifications under Section 4 of the Act dated 11th February, 2004 and 29th August, 2006 to the extent of invocation of urgency clause with liberty to the State to proceed with the hearing of objections under Section 5A of the Act and with further direction as to refund of compensation already received by the land owners. The operative part of the order is as follows:-
"1. The notification dated 11th February, 2004 under Section 4 of the Act is partly quashed to the extent it invokes Section 17(1)/17(4) and mentions the acquisition as an acquisition for "public purpose". All subsequent proceedings consequent to the notification dated 11th February, 2004 including the notification under Section 6 dated 25th June, 2004 are quashed.

2. The Collector shall proceed with the inquiry under Section 5A in continuation of the notification dated 11th February, 2004 and proceed with the proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The notice be issued by the Collector inviting objection under Section 5A of the Act in newspaper having wide circulation by not giving less than 30 days period for filing objection.

3. The notification under Section 4 dated 29th August, 2006 is partly quashed insofar as it invokes Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act. All subsequent proceedings consequent to the notification dated 29th August, 2006 including the notification under Section 6 dated 20th February, 2007 are quashed.

4. The Collector shall proceed with the inquiry under Section 5A in continuation of the notification dated 29th August, 2006 and proceed with the proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The notice be issued by the Collector inviting objection under Section 5A of the Act in newspaper having wide circulation by not giving less than 30 days period for filing objection.

5. As a result of quashing of the notification dated 25th June, 2004 and 20th February, 2007, the petitioners are liable to refund the compensation received from the respondents. However, we provide that it shall be open for those tenure holders, who have no objection to the acquisition, to indicate so in their objection to be filed under Section 5A in which event they may seek exemption from the Collector for refunding the compensation. The Collector shall proceed to decide the objection under Section 5A of the Act of only those tenure holders who have refunded the compensation received by them.

6. The Collector may recover the compensation as arrears of land revenue from the tenure holders who before the Collector do not in writing indicate their no objection with the acquisition.

7. The Collector in the proceedings for acquisition and hearing of the objection under Section 5A of the Act shall be entitled to pass such orders and take such proceedings as may be necessary with regard to refund/deposit of the compensation.

8. We further direct the Collector to get the substance of this order published in all the leading newspapers, both in English and Hindi, for information to all concerned."

(3.)Though most of the appeals have been preferred by M/s Reliance Power Ltd. [formerly known as Reliance Energy Generation Ltd.] [for short 'the Company'] at whose instance the land in question was sought to be acquired, against part quashing of acquisition proceedings, some of the land owners have also appealed to this Court with the grievance that having held that the proceedings were initiated on the grounds of illegality and fraud, the High Court ought to have quashed the acquisition proceedings in entirety.