B.D. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge of this Court by which a petition filed by the Appellant Under Article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties at some length we are of the opinion that this appeal must be allowed.
(2.) THE Appellant is the owner of considerable land in Tanakpur. On 1 -4 -1964, a notification Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was published in which it was stated, that about 6 acres of land were required for a public purpose and that the provisions contained in Section 17 of the Act were applicable. The details of the area measuring approximately 6 acres sought to be acquired were stated in the notification as follows: Zila -Nainital Pargana -Tanakpur Mauza -Tanakpur. After this came a statement that the land was required for building a Roadways Workshop and for a parking place for buses. This statement was followed by a note to the effect that a site plan of the above land could be seen in the office of the Collector at Nainital. This was followed by a notification Under Section 6 of the Act dated 7 -5 -1964, in which the description of the property and the purpose for which it was required were repeated as above arid there was an identical note that the site -plan might be inspected at the office of the Collector, Nainital.
(3.) THE Appellant filed the petition giving rise to this appeal claiming a writ of certiorari quashing the above notifications Under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act on a number of grounds. Out of those grounds the only one; which has been pressed before us was to the effect that the description of the property in both the notifications was too vague to satisfy the requirements of the law. The learned Single Judge took the view that since the location of the land could be ascertained on seeing the site -plan in the office of the Collector Nainital, non of the notifications was bad; and having found the other grounds raised in support of the petition not sustainable, he dismissed the petition.;