9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (8) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acres mentioned in the schedule attached to the notification. The material part of the notification reads as under : Whereas it appears to the Chief Commissioner of Delhi that land is likely to be required to be taken at the public expense for a public purpose namely for the execution of the Interim General Plan for the Greater Delhi, it is hereby notified that the land described in the Schedule below is likely to be required for the above purpose. The notification was published in the Delhi Gazette on September 12, 1957. Large tracts of land belonging to the appellant and situated in villages Garhi Jaharia Maria and Zamurdupur were covered by the above notification. Declaration dated February 15, 1961 under Section 6 of the Act in respect of the land of the appellant and some other lands covered by the above notification was published on February 23, 1961. On or about February 24, 1961 the appellant filed petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the notification under Section 4 of the Act on various grounds, to which reference would be made hereafter. The Union of India, the Delhi Development Authority and the Chief Commissioner were implea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Munshi Singh and Ors. (supra) the complaint of the appellant was that he was unable to object' effectively Under Section 5A of the Act to the purposed acquisition. The appellant in that case in that context referred to the fact that a scheme of planned development was not made available to him in spite of his application. As against that, as already mentioned, no objection was taken by the appellant that because of alleged vagueness of the public purpose he was not able to file any effective objection under Section 5A of the Act. The case of Munshi Singh, it may also be pointed out, was considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Aflatoon and Ors. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors. [1975] 1 SCR 802 . and it was observed that in the case of acquisition of a large area of land comprising several plots belonging to different persons, the specification of the purpose can only be with reference to the acquisition of the whole area. Unlike in the case of acquisition of a small area, it might practically be difficult to specify the particular public purpose for which each and every item of land comprised in the area is needed. This Court in that case u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act. 6. Equally devoid of force is the submission that the proceedings for the acquisition of land are liable to be struck down on the ground that the notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued for the collateral purpose of freezing the land of the appellant. As already stated above, the public purpose mentioned in the notification under Section 4 of the Act was the execution of the Interim General Plan for the Greater Delhi. It is true that the effect of the notification under Section 4 of the Act was to freeze the land, but that fact would not in any away effect the validity of the notification. The object of a notification under Section 4 is to give public notice that it is proposed to acquire the land mentioned in the notification and that any one who deals in that land subsequent to the notification would do so at his own risk. According to Section 23 of the Act, in determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under the Act, the Court shall take into consideration, besides other factors, the market-value of the land at the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4. It is further provided in Section 24 of the Act that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal has advanced only one contention. According to the learned Counsel, no adequate opportunity was given to the appellant of being heard after the appellant had filed objections under Section 5A of the Act to the acquisition of the land. Clause (2) of Section 5A reads as under : (2) Every objection under Sub-section (1) shall be made to the Collector in writing, and the Collector shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by pleader and shall after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under Section 4, Sub-section (1), or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land, to the appropriate Government, containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the proceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government. The decision of the appropriate Government shall be final. After notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on November 13, 1950 the appellant company filed objections on December 12, 1959. Intimation was thereupon given to the appellant that the objec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
