- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioners have preferred this writ petition, with the prayer, that Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (written as Section 16 of the Land Revenue Act, 1894 in the prayer clause of the writ petition) be declared as ultravires to the Constitution and further to regularise the land bearing Khasra Nos. 63, 65, 67, 179, 185, 68, 168, 169, 170 & 173 situated in Village Chainpura, Tehsil, Sanganer, District, Jaipur. The petitioners have also prayed that an appropriate writ be issued to respondents to decide the application filed by petitioners for regularisation of aforesaid land under Section 90-B of the Land Revenue Act.
(3.) The petitioners, in the writ petition, have averred that disputed land is in their Khatedari and possession. On 21st August, 1969 a notification under Section 4 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition 'Act, 1953' (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1953) was issued for acquisition of land. Thereafter, notification under Section 6 was also issued on 20th February, 1973 and without considering the objections of Khatedars, award was passed on 17.5.1975, which was challenged by way of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 942/1974 (Neta vs. State & Ors.) before this Court, which was decided on 8th May, 1975. It was further averred that in the order passed in writ petition No.942/1974, it was admitted that some of the land acquired, which is in dispute is reserved for Aerodrome. The notification was issued for acquisition of land by Urban Improvement Trust, which was challenged by Govinda & others by filing writ petition No.743/1975, which was decided on 19th March, 1978. The above land was reserved for extension of Aerodrome, but remained in the cultivatory possession of petitioners. The petitioners have not received any compensation in pursuance of award passed in the case. Section 16 of the Act of 1894 is ultravires as no time limit is provided for taking possession, as in the present case even awards have been passed in 1975 and 1976, but possession has not been taken so far. There is a provision of limitation of one year for issuing notification under Section 6 after notification under Section 4 and if the same is not issued then proceedings shall lapse and if award is not passed within two years from the date of declaration under Section 6 then all land acquisition proceedings will lapse under Section 11-A of the Act of 1894, whereas no such limitation or time limit is prescribed under Section 16. Therefore, it is ultavires to the constitutional provisions. The Jaipur Development Authority is now bent upon to dispossess the petitioners and wants to convert the Said land for commercial purpose; whereas acquisition was made for extension of Aerodrome. The petitioners further pleaded that petitioners moved an application to the respondents in August, 2005 for regularisation of land in question under Section 90-B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act,1956 and the application is still pending and no decision has been taken on the application. ;