- (1.) B. C. Kandpal, J. 1. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents with regard to their land and sought the writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notification dated 4-5-2004 issued by the Government U/s 4 (1) as well as the notification dated 14-3-2005, issued U/s 6 of the Land Acquisi tion Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as the Act' ).
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the land in question is situated within the mu nicipal limits of Dehradun and is located in extremely well developed urban area known and described as Rajpur Road. The land in question is bounded by Rajpur Road on one side, Subhash Marg on the other and Eucalyptus Road on the third side. The entire area where the land is situated is fully developed, consisting of Government Girls Inter College, Dehradun and other residential and commercial buildings which include general community facilities including wedding halls etc. The land in question is situated in the heart of the urban conglomeration of Dehradun city and all the land is under full urban use by the owners. In the year 2000, the new State of Uttaranchal was created and the State Reorganization Act, 2000 was promulgated and enforced by the Parlia ment. In pursuance of the creation of the new State, it was decided to accommo date part of the government activities and offices in the city of Dehradun provision ally and as an interim measure. Other important government institutions and offices, like the High Court etc. were ac commodated at Nainital. Dehradun is thus being used provisionally and temporarily as the capital of the State of Uttaranchal. The same description of Dehradun as pro visional capital, appears in the official records of the Home Ministry, Govt. of India, pertaining the State Reorganization. Accordingly all the perceived and projected needs and requirements of lands and buildings in and around Dehradun city would essentially have to be gauged and assessed keeping in mind the purely interim nature of such requirements, dependent upon the provisional status of the city of Dehradun as capital of Uttaranchal. It is also pleaded that near the land in dispute there is already situated the building and area currently accommodating the State Government Secretariat. The same is spread over a vast area of approximately more than two hectares. The Vidhan Sabha and other government buildings of the State are situated on the Haridwar Road; that the State Government has al ready acquired 500 acres of land along the Dehradun-Saharanpur Bye-pass Road adjacent to Vidhan Sabha and another 500 acres on the Sahasdhara Road; that all this land is available with the State Government and that this land is meant for the purpose of government buildings, including Vidhan Sabha, Government Secretariat etc. The petitioners further pleaded that their land has over 200 trees standing, which include extremely rare and exotic trees in abundance, like sandal wood etc; that the said land also contain large number of residential buildings, which are in use of the petitioners and other resi dents; that the land is fully developed ur ban land and that the land of the peti tioners is neither rural nor village land and is situated within the Municipal limits. It is the further case of the peti tioners that on 5-4-2004, a notification was issued by the respondents purportedly U/s 4 of the 'act'. The reason for acqui sition, stated in the said notification, was the general need, for public schemes and for the extension of the Secretariat to the north and south. The said notification was issued by invoking the emergency clause U/s 17 of the 'act', by doing away with the statutory requirement of Section 5 of the 'act'. This notification further de scribed the land under acquisition as be ing situated in village Uddivala Karanpur in District Dehradun admeasuring 2. 301 hectares; that the land was described in terms of Khasra numbers and that the said notification further made mention of certain houses and trees situated in the land described as village land of Uddivala Karanpur. Further case of the petitioners is that the utmost malafide on the part of the respondents is demonstrated by the fact that the notification deliberately gave a wrong and misleading description of the land as being situated in a village so as to give the impression that it was rural--land that was being acquired for the de velopment purposes. In fact, the Dehradun Township was established dur ing the turn of the century, along side the development of New Delhi. The entire area of the township of Dehradun was within the Municipal limits established in the first decade of the century before last. All the land is part and parcel of Municipal land described and recorded in the Municipal records in terms of the urban conglomeration, with road, colonies and education institutions. The D. A. V College, the prime I graduation college was established before I 1925. Hence the intention of the respond- I ents in trying to mis-describe the land as I village land, establishes their malafides.
(3.) THE petitioners also alleged that the I said notification U/s 4 of the Act was challenged before the High Court in terms I of writ petition No. 469 of 2004. This court vide order dated 30-10-2004 passed I the following order : "in these three writ petitions, particulary in writ petition No. 469 of 2004 I (M/b) and 874 O/2004 (M/b) the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act has been challenged. So also challenge is to the notification under section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act by applying the urgency clause. In writ petition no. 480 of 2004 (M/b), there is a common challenge to the notification which prouides for the acquisition of the land for extension of the Secretariat as also for the expansion of the road. THEse notifications are different. Mr. Sudhanshu Dhulia, Senior Advocate, in his usual fairness has shown readiness to hear the petitioners or as the case may be the persons interested, instead of going ahead with the urgency clause and more particularly dispensing with the enquiry under section 5-A. In view of the statement made, Mr. Naithani, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners with- draws the writ petitions, so far as challenge to the notification dated 5-5-2004 is concerned. In view of the urgency felt, we feel that it will be better for us to fix the programme. Public notice shall, therefore, be given within seven days from today inciting the objections. THE concerned Land Acquisition Officer, who is to hear the objection, shall-hear them within fifteen days/ All the objections shall be filed before the Land Acquisi tion Officer and life Land Acquisition Officer shall dispose of the matter one way or the other after giving full op portunity of hearing, etc. by Decem ber, 2004 or as the case may be ear lier thereto. With this, we dispose of writ petition no. 469 0f 2004/34 (M/b), 874 of 2004 (M/b) and partly writ petition no. 480 of 2004 (M/b)" Consequent upon the aforesaid or der the petitioners submitted their objec tions dated 11-1,11- 2004, 16-11-2004 and 23-11-2004 before the court of Special Land Acquisition Officer/collector, Dehradun. In the said objections, the pe titioners challenged the acquisition pro ceedings as the Same being vitiated for the reason that there! was no legitimate, endur ing or genuine public purposes for acquir ing the petitioners land. The impugned ac quisition was also challenged as prima facie establishing utter lack of bonafides. Replies to the said objections were filed by the re spondents. Upon enquiry, the petitioners learnt that their objections were rejected by the Special Land Acquisition Officer vide order dated 30-12-2004 and notification U/s 6 has been issued on 14-3-2005 by again invoking emergency clause. The petitioners also pleaded that before the gov ernment takes possession of the land, it is necessary and mandatory for them to pay 80% amount as compensation to the affected citizens. It was also alleged by the petitioners that the land adjacent to Rajpur road is being used by residents of Dehradun as shopping malls and more than 11 ap proved shopping malls as well as 15 ho tels and restaurants have been constructed there with high quality of architectural buildings. One of the petitioners applied for the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority for establishing a shopping mail on 19-12-2002 which is still pending. Thereafter, an objection was raised by the Authority, which was removed subse quently and all permissions with regard to Fire Brigade, P. W. D. and others were cleared. It was further alleged that Khasra numbers out of which the property No. I/ 10, 13/25, 27, 29, 35, 38, 45, 54, 62/82, 84/90, 92/96, 97, 139, 69/17 and 91/181 are situated at the erstwhile village of Uddiwala Karanpur. These all now form part of 24, Rajpur Road, Dehradun and are not at all situated in any rural area. That the area of 24, Rajpur Road, in which the disputed property of the petitioners are located, is fully occupied and is being used. There are buildings in the notified area, which are as old as 74 years. It was also alleged that till date, the petitioners are in actual physical occupation of the land in dispute. In case if the petitioners are dis possessed from the land in dispute they will suffer irreparable loss. The petitioners have therefore alleged that they are deeply ag grieved by the impugned acquisition noti fications issued U/ss 4 and 6 of the Act and are compelled to file the writ petition. They have no alterative efficacious remedy available.;