9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to validity of land acquisition notification u/s 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894; Availability of alternative lands and suitability for construction; Compliance with procedural requirements of notification publication u/s 4(1); Lapse of notification u/s 4(1) due to limitation period.
Validity of Land Acquisition Notification u/s 4(1): Appellants challenged notification acquiring land for a Cooperative Society, alleging mala fide intent due to prior acquisitions. Court held providing house sites for society members is a valid public purpose. Previous acquisitions not deemed mala fide. Availability of Alternative Lands and Suitability for Construction: Appellants argued alternative lands exist and current lands are unsuitable. Single Judge negated this, stating it's a case-specific factual matter. No merit found in this contention. Compliance with Procedural Requirements of Notification Publication u/s 4(1): Appellants raised concerns about procedural irregularities in notification publication. Court noted publication in newspaper preceded Gazette publication due to administrative oversight. Emphasized purpose of notification is to inform landowners of proposed acquisition, which was achieved despite procedural irregularity. Compliance with Section 4(1) requirements upheld. Lapse of Notification u/s 4(1) due to Limitation Period: Appellants argued notification lapsed due to limitation period and pending legal proceedings. Court ruled writ petitions filed promptly after notification publication, excluding time taken for legal proceedings from limitation period calculation. Notification not deemed lapsed; Government directed to proceed with objections consideration and declaration publication if public purpose persists. Conclusion: Appeals dismissed with direction for Government to address objections and publish declaration within specified timeline. No costs imposed.
|
