9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndustrial Development Authority (GNIDA). Land of the Respondents is in Village Chhapruala and is part of larger area of land acquired falling in many adjoining villages. The Award was declared on 31st March, 2011. 3. The original Petitioners did not receive the compensation as they had already filed a petition in the High Court on 3rd March, 2009 mainly on the ground that the urgency Clause could not have been invoked so as to deprive the land owners of their right to file objections. On coming to know of the proposed acquisition, the Respondents made representation dated 11th April, 2008 stating that they were running an agro based industry and floriculture for producing hybrid seeds of flowers. Case of the writ Petitioners was that possession was wrongly shown to have been taken on 9th March, 2009 as interim order was already passed on 5th March, 2009. 4. The writ Petitioners relied upon decisions of this Court inter alia in Anand Singh v. State of U.P. (2010) 11 SCC 242, Dev Sharan v. State of U.P. (2011) 4 SCC 769, Radhey Shyam (dead) through L.Rs. v. State of U.P. (2011) 5 SCC 553, Devendra Kumar Tyagi and Ors. v. State of U.P. (2011) 9 SCC 164, Devendra Singh and Ors. v. St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in Savitri Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015) 7 SCC 21. Subject to the moulding of relief as above, the Full Bench had upheld the acquisition relating to village Chhapraula covered by the very same notification as in the present case. It was submitted that large scale development work had already been executed on the acquired land. 82 per cent land owners had accepted compensation which covered 76 per cent of the land in terms of the area, the GNIDA had constructed roads, laid down sewer lines, electric transmission lines, developed green belts, provided drinking water facility and other infrastructure. In these circumstances, the impugned judgment could not be sustained. Learned Counsel for the Respondents supports the impugned judgment. 8. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at length and perused the record including the lay out plan showing Sectors 13 and 16 (Ind.) in Greater Noida (West). 9. Only question for consideration is whether the matter is covered by the judgment of this Court in Savitri Devi (supra), as claimed by the Appellant in which case the Respondents will be entitled to relief of higher compensation and allotment of land instead of quashing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foregoing conclusions we order as follows: 1. The Writ Petition No. 45933 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 47545 of 2011 relating to village Nithari, Writ Petition No. 47522 of 2011 relating to village Sadarpur, Writ Petition No. 45196 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45208 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45211 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45213 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45216 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45223 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45224 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45226 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45229 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45230 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45235 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45238 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 45283 of 2011 relating to village Khoda, Writ Petition No. 46764 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 46785 of 2011 relating to village Sultanpur, Writ Petition No. 46407 of 2011 relating to village Chaura Sadatpur and Writ Petition No. 46470 of 2011 relating to village Alaverdipur which have been filed with inordinate delay and laches are dismissed. 2(i). The writ petitions of Group 40 (Village Devla) being Writ Petition No. 31126 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 59131 of 2009, Writ Petition No. 22800 of 2010, Writ Petition No. 37118 of 2011, Writ Petition No. 42812 of 2009, Writ Pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for allotment of developed Abadi plot to the extent of 10% of their acquired land subject to maximum of 2500 square meters. We however, leave it open to the Authority in cases where allotment of abadi plot to the extent of 6% or 8% have already been made either to make allotment of the balance of the area or may compensate the land owners by payment of the amount equivalent to balance area as per average rate of allotment made of developed residential plots. 4. The Authority may also take a decision as to whether benefit of additional compensation and allotment of abadi plot to the extent of 10% be also given to; (a) those land holders whose earlier writ petition challenging the notifications have been dismissed upholding the notifications; and (b) those land holders who have not come to the Court, relating to the notifications which are subject matter of challenge in writ petitions mentioned at direction No. 3. 5. The Greater NOIDA and its allottees are directed not to carry on development and not to implement the Master Plan 2021 till the observations and directions of the National Capital Regional Planning Board are incorporated in Master Plan 2021 to the satisfaction o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the acquired land as noted in para 50 of the Full Bench judgment already quoted hereinabove. Filing of prompt petitions by an individual is not the only consideration for grant of relief of quashing acquisition when almost entire land has already been developed. The Full Bench has quashed acquisition only where substantial part of the land had not been developed. The category of the judgment where acquisition has not been quashed covers the entire village where land of the Respondents is located. 16. The Respondents are, thus, entitled to be treated at par with other similarly placed persons. They are entitled to the following relief as per para 48.1 to 48.3 of the judgment of this Court in Savitri Devi (supra): 48.1. Increasing the compensation by 64.7%; 48.2. Directing allotment of developed abadi land to the extent of 10% of the land acquired of each of the landowners; 48.3. Compensation which is increased @64.7% is payable immediately without taking away the rights of the landowners to claim higher compensation under the machinery provided in the Land Acquisition Act wherein the matter would be examined on the basis of the evidence produced to arrive at just and fair m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
