JUDGEMENT
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. -
(1.) THESE two writ petitions have been filed challenging the notifications dated 22nd May, 2006 issued under Section 4 read with
Section 17(1) and 17(4) as well as declaration dated 31st May, 2006
issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter
referred to as the Act) for acquiring the agricultural land of the
petitioners situate in village Benazirpura alias Ghatampura, Tehsil
Sadar, District Rampur.
(2.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in Writ Petition No.31224 of 2006 which is being treated as leading writ
petition.
Brief facts giving rise to the writ petitions are; a notification under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act was
issued proposing to acquire 3.989 hectares of land situate in village
Benazirpura alias Ghatampura for public purpose, namely, sewage
treatment plant in district Rampur. The notification was published in
Hindi Daily "Amar Ujala" on 24th May, 2006 and also in in Urdu Daily.
The declaration under Section 6 was issued on 31st May, 2006. The
notice under Section 9 of the Act was issued on 3rd June, 2006
inviting objections to be filed by 17th June, 2006 regarding the land
of which possession is proposed to be taken. On 14th June, 2006
notice was issued offering 80% of compensation for the land
acquired and the tenure holders were asked to appear on 17th June,
2006 and receive 80% compensation. The possession of the land was taken and handed over to the acquiring body i.e. Construction
Unit of U.P. Jal Nigam, Rampur on 19th June, 2006 for construction
of sewage treatment plant (STP). Immediately after taking
possession, the Construction Unit of Jal Nigam proceeded for
construction in Zone -I and started laying sewer line in various
localities of district Rampur. The petitioner filed the present writ
petition in this Court in which an order was passed on 6th July, 2006
directing the parties to maintain status quo. Counter affidavit and
rejoinder affidavit were exchanged. This Court directed the State
Government to produce the record of land acquisition proceeding in
question. Learned Standing Counsel has produced the original
record of the State Government pertaining to the land acquisition
proceeding which were perused by this Court.
(3.) WE have heard Sri K. Ajit and Sri Pramod Kumar Sinha, learned counsels for the petitioners, Sri R.K. Chaubey, learned
Standing Counsel has been heard for the State and Sri Krishnaji
Khare has appeared for the U.P. Jal Nigam.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.