- (1.) Challenge in this bunch of writ petitions C.W.P. Nos. 5772 of 1981, 3285 and 3396 of 1986 and 3124 of 1987 is directed against the legality and validity of the scheme titled 11475. Acres Development-cum-Housing Accommodation Scheme on the right side of Pakhowal Road beyond Sidhwan Canal at Ludhiana" (hereinafter referred to as the 'Scheme') prepared by Improvement Trust, Ludhiana (Respondent No. 2) and approved vide resolution No. 28 passed in its meeting held on March 24, f976 and consequent acquisition proceedings taken up by Respondent No. 1 to acquire the land of the petitioners. Since the issues of law and fact raised in these writ petitions are identical, they are proposed to be disposed of by a common Judgment.
(2.) A broad-brush factual backdrop of CWP No. 5772 of 1981 will help delineate the contours of forensic controversy : Respondent No. 2 approved the Scheme in its meeting held on March 24, 1976 through Resolution No. 28. the Chairman of Respondent No. 2 was authorised to issue notices under Sections 36, 37 and 38 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Notices under Section 36 of the Act inviting objections to the Scheme were published in the Government Gazette dated July 2, 1976 and also in the daily newspapers. After the expiry of the prescribed period, the objections submitted by the objectors were considered. Those of the objectors who desired to be heard were given a hearing. The Scheme, with certain modifications, was submitted to the State Government for sanction vide Resolution No. 66 dated May 7, 1979. Notices under sub-section (3) of Section 40 of the Act were published notifying inter alia the fact that the Trust had submitted an application to the Punjab Government for the sanction of the Scheme. The Punjab Government in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 41 of the Act sanctioned this Scheme. Description of the lands comprised in the Scheme is given therein. It is also intimated that the Trust may acquire the area comprised in the Scheme or any part of it and may lay out new roads; streets and provide open spaces. The State Government notified the sanction of a Scheme through notification dated June 28, 1979 issued under Section 41 of the Act. Notices under Section 16 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act were served on Baldev Singh, petitioner No. I and some other petitioners. Aggrieved by the farming of the Scheme and the acquisition proceedings, the petitioners filed CWP No. 5772 of 1981 on December 22, 1981. On receipt of notice of motion, the respondents filed written statements controverting the material averments of the petitioners. The petitioners filed a replication. On February 9, 1984, the Motion Bench dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners had suppressed material facts while filing the writ petition. The petitioners filed a review petition, which was also declined on July 31, 1984. They filed Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1987 after obtaining special leave from the final Court and the same was allowed vide order dated January 5, 1987 and the orders of the Court dated February 9, 1994 dismissing the writ petition and order dated July 31, 1984 dismissing the review petition were set aside and the case was remanded to this Court for decision on merits. After remand, the petitioners filed an application for amendment of the writ petition. The same was allowed and amended writ petition was filed. The respondents have filed written statement thereto resisting the writ petition. They have controverted the material averments made in the writ petition. The petitioners have filed their replication reiterating their stand in the writ petition.
(3.) it has been contended by Shri Gurbachan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the Scheme approved by the Trust vide Resolution No. 28 dated March 24, 1976 was not submitted to the State Government under sub-section (1) of Section 40 of the Act for sanction. Rather, an application was made to the State Government for sanction of a Scheme prepared in compliance with Resolution No. 66 dated May 7, 1979. Notices under Sections 36 and 38 of the Act relating to this Scheme were never issued or published. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that though notices under Section 36 were published inviting objections to the Scheme approved vide Resolution No. 28 dated March 24, 1976, yet notices under Section 38 were neither issued nor served on any of the petitioners.;