- (1.) All these matters relate to the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the State of Rajasthan at the request of Jaipur Development Authority (for short JDA) for widening the stretch of Bhawani Singh Road from Rambagh Circle to Indira Circle in the city of Jaipur. The petitioners in all these 20 writ petitions have impugned the notification dated July 10, 2002, notice dated September 16, 2002, another Notification dated November 2, 2002 and the notice dated November 2, 2002 issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the L.A. Act).
(2.) Bhawani Singh Road, which stretches from Bais Godown to Indira Circle is a part of the Main artery of Jaipur which runs from 'Ajmer Road' in the West to 'Jawahar Nagar Bye-pass' in the East of Jaipur. The stretch in dispute relates only to the part of the Road which is only 60 ft. wide. The rest of the Road in most of the places, is 100 ft. wide and in some of the places 165 ft. wide, JDA felt that the part of the Road which is 60 ft. wide was creating traffic chaos and congestion therefore it decided to widen the particular segment of the road from 60 ft. to 100 ft. and requested the State Government to acquire 20 ft. of land from both the sides of the Road and the State Government initiated land acquisition proceedings through Notifications and notices which are the subject matter of the instant writ petitions.
(3.) Impugned notifications and notices have been assailed by the petitioners on the following grounds - (a) After the 74th amendment in the Constitution of India, the task of 'construction of roads and bridges in towns and cities has been handed over to the Municipality. Therefore, the JDA is non est in the eyes of law. It no longer has any jurisdiction or power to widen roads in Jaipur. Thus the JDA was not justified in requesting the State Government to acquire the land for its benefit and the impugned Notifications and notices were void ab initio. (b) The acquisition proceedings suffer from virus of non-application of mind as prior to issuing Notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act, the JDA has not carried out any survey to decide the area of land, required for the purpose of widening the road. (c) No survey was carried out by the JDA as required under sub-section (2) of Section 4 of L.A. Act. (d) After the State Government issued the notice under Section 5-A of L.A. Act inviting objections from the interested persons in regard to proposed acquisition, invoking the emergent provisions under Section 17 of L.A. Act was not justified. (e) Notification under Section 17 of L.A. Act was void ab initio as it was not in terms of Section 17. (f) Neither the State Government nor JDA revealed the nature of urgency in invoking the emergent power under Section 17. Thus invoking the said power amounts to colourable exercise of powers. (g) Acquiring 20 ft. of land would place the private house, educational and medical institutions literally on the road and expose them to noise and air pollution. (h) The action of JDA in widening the road would amount to violation of JDA Bye-laws. (i) The proposed acquisition would mean the cutting of healthy trees on both sides of the road which would adversely affect the environment. 3A. The respondents State of Rajasthan and JDA have submitted returns to the writ petitions denying the claim of the petitioners.;