Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) A challenge has been made to the order dated 1 -8 -2014 passed by the Competent Authority under Section 20D of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1989'), the consequent declaration dated 12 -8 -2014 under Section 20E of the said Act published in Rajasthan Patrika on 15 -8 -2014 as also to the award dated 15 -9 -2014 passed by the Competent Authority under Section 20F thereof. It has been prayed that the petitioner not be dispossessed from its land in khasra No. 327, village Thara Tehsil Tijara District Alwar.
(2.) THE background facts are that in respect of very same land in khasra No. 327 village Thara an earlier notification under Section 20A(1) of the Act of 1989 was issued on 23 -1 -2011. Objections filed by the petitioner company before the competent authority under Section 20D(2) were accepted vide order dated 26 -9 -2011. The petitioner company's aforesaid land was consequently not included in the declaration under Section 20E of the Act of 1989. It however appears that thereafter on reconsideration of the matter, the Central Government realised that the exclusion of petitioner's land in khasra No. 327 village Thara was a veritable faux pass in the context of other lands having been acquired with reference to the approved alignment of the Delhi -Mumbai dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC), and that the competent authority passing the order dated 26 -9 -2011 had misdirected itself in releasing the petitioner's land from acquisition on a misrepresentation of fact if not worse. The acquisition of the petitioner's land was therefore an absolute technical necessity. In these circumstances a fresh notification under Section 20A (1) of the Act of 1989 was issued on 18 -5 -2012 qua the petitioner's land in khasra No. 327 Village Thara and published in newspapers on 22 -6 -2012. The petitioner company filed its objections thereto on 20 -7 -2012, but soon approached this court on 13 -8 -2012 by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. On the matter coming up before this court, on 30 -10 -2012 it was directed that till 27 -11 -2012 publication of declaration under Section 20E(2) of the Act of 1989 not be issued. The said interim order was continued till 23 -7 -2014 when the earlier interim order was modified and the respondents were allowed to proceed with the acquisition and issue the notification under Section 20E(2) of the Act of 1989 - -however with restraint on the petitioner's dispossession. Pursuant to the modified interim order aforesaid, the objections of the petitioner company to the notification dated 18 -5 -2012 was dismissed on 1 -8 -2014 by the competent authority. The notification under Section 20E(2) of the Act of 1989 followed on 12 -8 -2014 and was published in news -paper on 15 -8 -2014. Inevitably the award under the Act of 1989 was passed on 15 -9 -2014. Possession however remains with the petitioner as per the interim protection under the court's order dated 23 -7 -2014.
(3.) MR . A.K. Sharma, Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that acquisition of the petitioner's land under Chapter IV -A of the Act of 1989 commencing with the second notification dated 18 -5 -2012 under Section 20A(1) of the Act of 1989 is wholly without jurisdiction, ultra vires the Act of 1989, discriminatory in nature, malafide and in breach of principles of natural justice. Therefore it is liable to be quashed and set aside. He submitted that the objections of petitioner company against acquisition of his land in khasra No. 327 village Thara pursuant to notification under Section 20A(1) of the Act of 1989 first issued on 23 -1 -2011 having been allowed by the competent authority on 26 -9 -2011, finality attached thereto under Section 20D(3) of the Act of 1989. It was submitted that this "finality" could not be circumvented by the respondents by issue of a fresh notification under Section 20A(1) of the Act of 1989 on 18 -5 -2012 qua the very same parcel of land. The said subsequent notification therefore is a colourable exercise of powers and hence ultra vires the Act of 1989. It was further submitted that the alleged final alignment for the DFC between Delhi -Mumbai by the Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Limited (DFCCIL) including the petitioner's land in khasra No. 327 village Thara was wholly arbitrary and discriminatory and determined with the sole intent of benefiting one AMCO Limited and another, Balaji Tirupati Buildcom Limited, whose land were to be acquired for the DFC as per the earlier alignment determined. It was submitted that petitioner's land is duly converted to residential use and construction plans therefor released by the UIT Bhiwari on its evaluation on 6 -9 -2010 in consultation with the State Government, that the petitioner company's land in khasra No. 327 village Thara did not fall within the approved alignment of the DFC. It was finally submitted that even otherwise the notification dated 12 -8 -2014 under Section 20E of the Act of 1989 as published on 15 -8 -2014 as also the subsequent award dated 15 -9 -2014 determining compensation to petitioner company for acquisition of its land in khasra No. 327 village Thara is liable to be quashed and set aside on the ground of denial of the statutorily prescribed hearing as mandated under Section 20D(2) of the Act of 1989.;