JUDGEMENT
B.S.Chauhan, J. -
(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed challenging
the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the petitioner's land.
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise
to this case are that petitioner had purchased
the land on 17.4.1975 from respondents No.
4 to 6. measuring two Bighas and two Biswas.
It appears that the mutation was not made in
his name and in the meanwhile, a Notification
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 (for short, "the Act") dated 4.2.1997
was published in the official gazette dated
7.2.1997 and the substance thereof was also
published in the local news paper on
25.2.1997. Petitioner initiated the legal proceedings
for mutation and the same was allowed vide order dated 19.4.1997 and the land
stood transferred in his name. Though petitioner had purchased the said land but he did
not file any objection under Section 5-A of the
Act and Declaration under Section 6 of the
Act was made on 15.6.1998. Notices under
section 9(3) of the Act were served upon the
persons whose names appeared in the revenue
record on the date of publication of Section 4
Notification i.e. respondents No.4 to 6 and'
the Land Acquisition Collector drew the Award
on 8.3.1999 and with the approval of the Collector,
the same was made on 29.4.1999. Possession of the property had been taken on
25.1.1999 (Annx.10). The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on the
grounds that he had not been given the notice
as required under Section 9(3), nor he had the
opportunity to file objection under Section 5-
A of the Act: Declaration under Section 6 of
the Act was beyond statutory limitation and,
therefore, ex-parte proceedings are bad and
the same are liable to be quashed. .
(3.) In State of U.P. v. Smt. Pista Devi,
the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that
where a large track of land is acquired and the
land belong to large number of persons, challenging the entire acquisition at the instance
of one or few persons should not be entertained, as it would hamper the development
of the entire land and purpose, for which the
land is sought to be acquired, would stood
frustrated at the behest of few persons though
the other affected persons have accepted the
acquisition proceedings and accepted the award
etc.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.