- (1.) RAVI S. Dhavan, J. Land Acquisi tion proceedings are the subject of these proceedings. But the matter is not so simple so as to consider the issues isolated to the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The aspects before the Court go beyond ac quisition proceedings. No issue would have been before the Court but for the fact that a planned exercise has been on for a decade and now will continue in continuity to depressurize Delhi so that it does not spew like a volcano and bring an end to itself by a self- indulgent unknowing exer cise to put everything under the sun in Lutyens Delhi where there is no more space left. Thus saving Delhi a consequen tial circumstance is a matter not uncon nected before this Court. Initially, when writ petitions came to this Court the petitioners did make a passing reference to the National Capital Region. So did the respondents. But, neither the petitioners nor the respondents submitted nor ap plied formally that one very crucial and essential party was conspicuous by its ab sence and be added to the proceedings. Eliminating or not arraying this particular party would have been fatal to the proceedings. This party is the National Capital Region Planning Board which owes its origin to the National Capital Region Planning Act, 1985.
(2.) THE National Capital Region is a concept which has been given by an Act of Parliament and it co- ordinates planning in the spread of Delhi with the States which adjoins the State of Delhi (Previously known as the Union Territory of Delhi ). THE States which border the State of Delhi are : the Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Haryana. As Delhi's presence is being felt even beyond 100 Kms. , within its strict periphery it cannot develop for lack of space. 1b decongest the National Capital the Parliament enacted the National Capi tal Region Planning Act, 1985. THE direct result of this was that it was planning and development of satellite townships in the surrounding States. THE purpose of this satellite township was primarily to place industry outside Delhi so as to make breathing within easier and given the oc casion, take out of it in a planned manner. Habitat was a consequential circumstance. This clearly implies that the Greater NOIDA a satellite township itself become a circumstance arising out of the National Capital Region and to establish this region a notification was issued by the State of U. P. on 28 January 1991 under the U. P. Industrial Areas Development Act, 1976. Thus, if the total import of these proceedings are to be understood, not referred to by the petitioners nor em phasized by the respondents, the National Capital Region Planning Act, 1985, could not be overlooked. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was only an exercise to co-or dinate the intention of the two enact ments; one which attempts to decongest Delhi, and the other which makes a satel lite town outside it. This being the Nation al Capital Region Planning Act, 1985, and the other the establishment of the Greater NOIDA under the U. P. Industrial Areas Development Act, 1976. The issues in these writ petitions, thus, will have to be seen in the perspective of the legislations referred t6 by the Court.
(3.) THE specific villages where the Land Acquisition proceedings gave an oc casion to the petitioners to come to this Court are the villages of Kasna and Surajpur, otherwise part of the district of Bulandshahr. The issues raised by the petitioners broadly are of the abadi (in other words, urbanization or habitat) which the respondents attempted to create. The petitioners contended that they also have a declaration from the Competent Authority under yet another legislation being the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 and the Rules framed there under. The submission is that the petitioners have a certificate of a decla ration by the Competent Authority, in a statutory proceeding to a certified abadi and, thus, the Land Acquisition proceed ings to divest them in lieu of the urbanization planned is ultra vires. They challenged the notifications under Sections 4, 6 and 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on various grounds but their main line of attack is that between a declaration ac corded to them under Section 143 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, certifying an urban area, the acquisition under the Land Ac quisition Act is a contradiction and the notifications could not hold. Consequent to this, there is also a plea that Section 5a of the Act having been eliminated in the exercise to acquire land, thus, there is no occasion for them to contend anywhere else except by these writ petitions.;