- (1.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the two petitioners have assailed the legality and validity of the notifications dated 14.10.2010 as well as 27.12.2010 issued under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(4) as well as Section 6(1) read with Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the 'Act'). The said notifications were issued for acquisition of an area 447.4526 hectare agricultural land situate in village Kherlibhav, Pargana Dankaur, Tehsil Sadar, District Gautam Budh Nagar for public purpose namely, planned development in district Gautam Budh Nagar through Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (respondent no. 3 herein). Petitioners claim that they are recorded co-tenure holders of plot no. 405 area 2.9570 hectare(hereinafter referred to as the 'plot in dispute'), which was also subject matter of impugned notifications.
(2.) At this stage, it may be pertinent to point out that notifications for acquisition of the land issued in 2010 were challenged by the petitioners by filing instant writ petition on 02.12.2013 after about 3 years. The Stamp Reporter has reported delay and laches of 2 years 264 days in presenting the petition.
(3.) We have heard Sri V.M.Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pankaj Lal appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 & 2, Sri Pradeep Kumar for respondent no. 3 and Sri Shakti Swarup Nigam who has made an application for impleadment of M/s. Supertech Township Pvt. Limited, which admittedly was allotted certain area of land under acquisition including the plot in dispute.;