Veerender Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) THE intra -court appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 20th December, 2011, sustaining the challenge to the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 29th December, 2008, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur, who while entertaining an appeal, interfered with the order dated 31st October, 2008, of the Authorized Officer (Land Resumption) & Land Acquisition Officer, U.I.T., Alwar, passed in exercise of powers under Section 90B(7) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956; (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1956', for short), setting aside the order dated 31st October, 2008, for a decision afresh.
(2.) SINCE the intra -court appeals are against the same judgment and order impugned therein, therefore, are being adjudicated upon by this common order. Briefly outlined, the essential material facts and particulars necessary for appreciation of the controversy needs to be first noticed. M/s. Omway Buildestate Pvt. Ltd. and one Shri Ghanshyam instituted writ proceedings, assailing the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 29th December, 2008, and with a prayer to uphold the order dated 31st October, 2008, passed by the Authorized Officer with reference to the agricultural lands situated in Village Bailaka Diwakri in Alwar District. The land in dispute was sought to be acquired by the State Government in view of resolution number 23 of the Urban Improvement Trust, Alwar (U.I.T.), proposing to set up a residential colony to be known as 'Rohini Nagar'. As a sequel, notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1894', for short), was issued on 25th July, 1995 and having considered the objections of the land owners/interested persons under Section 5A; a declaration under Section 6 of the Act of 1894, was published by notification dated 20th January, 1997, ultimately culminating into an award under Section 11 of the Act of 1894, on 25th June, 1998. However, neither possession was taken nor any compensation was offered or paid to the land owners (predecessors -in -interest) or to the writ petitioners. Be that as it may, on 10th August, 2000, the U.I.T., Alwar, decided to de -acquire the land in dispute keeping in view the availability of other land with the U.I.T., and owing to slow speed of disposal of the land, non -availability of funds for compensation to be paid and its poor financial conditions. A letter/communication dated 12th April, 2001, was addressed by the Director, NCR & Secretary, U.I.T., Alwar, to the State Government to de -acquire the land in dispute followed by a reminder on 29th August, 2001. For reaffirming the policy decision to de -acquire the land in dispute, a notice dated 16th October, 2004, was also published in the newspapers inviting objections from the persons interested. The process was followed by a notification under Section 48 of the Act of 1894, published in the gazette on 1st December, 2006; de -acquiring the land in dispute. During the process aforesaid, the writ petitioners purchased the land in dispute through registered sale deed(s) on 22nd March, 2006 and 10th November, 2006, from various khatedars/land owners. Subsequent to de -acquisition of the land vide notification dated 1st December, 2006, the writ petitioners; Ghanshyam and M/s. Omway Buildestate Pvt. Ltd., made applications on 9th March, 2007, under Section 90B(3) of the Act of 1956 in respect of 3.45 hectares and 9.37 hectares respectively, for development of residential township in their joint venture. In sequel of the applications under Section 90B(3) of the writ petitioners, notices were published on 30th March, 2007, in daily newspaper i.e., 'Rajasthan Patrika', inviting objections. Both the applications under Section 90B(3) of the Act of 1894, were allowed by the Authorized Officer, considering the objections of the interested persons vide order dated 14th June, 2007, and the land in dispute was mutated in the name of U.I.T., Alwar, on 19th June, 2007, followed by approval of layout plan by the U.I.T. along with road network plan as well.
(3.) RAJESH Agarwal (appellant herein), one of the applicants and allegedly interested person, having raised the objections before the Authorized Officer, aggrieved of the order dated 14th June, 2007, filed an appeal under Section 90B(7) of the Act of 1956, before the Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur. As a consequence thereof, the order dated 14th June, 2007, was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Authorized Officer for decision afresh in the light of what was observed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 21st August, 2007.;