9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar for development and utilization thereof for residential, commercial and institutional parts of different sectors of Bahadurgarh. 5. The predecessors of the Appellant and other landowners filed objections under Section 5A(1) and prayed that their land may not be acquired because they had developed the same for agricultural activities like dairy, gardening etc. by investing huge money. They claimed that the acquisition proceedings were initiated without application of mind and there was no justification to acquire fertile and irrigated land. They also pointed out that land acquired for the same purpose in 1965 was still lying vacant and undeveloped. Another objection taken by the predecessors of the Appellant and other landowners was that the area proposed to be acquired falls in the National Capital Region under the National Capital Region Planning Board Act, 1985 (for short, "the 1985 Act") and in the Regional Plan prepared by the National Capital Region Planning Board (for short, "the Board"), land in question has been shown as part of Green Belt/Green Wedge and, as such, the same cannot be acquired for residential, commer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1996) 11 SCC 698, Swaika Properties (P) Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan : (2008) 4 SCC 695 and Sawaran Lata v. State of Harayana (2010) 4 SCC 532 and held as under : It is, thus, well settled that no writ petition would be competent after passing of award because possession of land is taken and it is deemed to vest in the State Government free from all encumbrances. The Petitioners would of course be entitled to compensation at the market value prevalent at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act in accordance with the award subject to further remedies of reference etc. The Petitioners would also be entitled to compensation for the user of the land from the date of possession to the date of notification issued under Section 4. Thus, no ground is made out to accept the contention raised by the Petitioners and to quash the acquisition proceedings subject matter of these petitions. 9. Mrs. Rani Chhabra, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants argued that the impugned order is liable to be set aside because the premise on which the High Court dismissed the writ petition, namely, vesting of the acquired land in the State Government is ex facie erroneous. Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the acquiring authority. 12. Since the Act does not prescribes the mode and manner of taking possession of the acquired land by the Collector, it will be useful to notice some of the judgments in which this issue has been considered. In Balwant Narayan Bhagde v. M.D. Bhagwat (1976) 1 SCC 700, Bhagwati J., (as he then was), speaking for himself and Gupta J. disagreed with Untwalia J., who delivered separate judgment and observed: ...We think it is enough to state that when the Government proceeds to take possession of the land acquired by it under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it must take actual possession of the land, since all interests in the land are sought to be acquired by it. There can be no question of taking "symbolical" possession in the sense understood by judicial decisions under the Code of Civil Procedure. Nor would possession merely on paper be enough. What the Act contemplates as a necessary condition of vesting of the land in the Government is the taking of actual possession of the land. How such possession may be taken would depend on the nature of the land. Such possession would have to be taken as the nature of the land admits of. There can be n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SCC 489, the Court referred to the observations made by Bhagwati, J. in Balwant Narayan Bhagde v. M.D. Bhagwat (supra) that no hard and fast rule can be laid down as to what act would be sufficient to constitute taking of possession of the acquired land and observed that when there is no crop or structure on the land only symbolic possession could be taken. 15. In NTPC v. Mahesh Dutta (2009) 8 SCC 339, the Court noted that Appellant NTPC paid 80 per cent of the total compensation in terms of Section 17(3A) and observed that it is difficult to comprehend that after depositing that much of amount it had obtained possession only on a small fraction of land. 16. In Sita Ram Bhandar Society v. Govt. of NCT, Delhi (2009) 10 SCC 501 and Omprakash Verma v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2010) 13 SCC 158, it was held that when possession is to be taken of a large tract of land then it is permissible to take possession by a properly executed panchnama. Similar view was expressed in the recent judgment in Brij Pal Bhargava v. State of UP 2011 (2) SCALE 692. 17. The same issue was recently considered in C.A. No. 3604 of 2011 Banda Development Authority, Banda v. Moti Lal Agarwal decided on 26.4.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the State Government because the actual and physical possession of the acquired land always remained with the Appellants and no evidence has been produced by the Respondents to show that possession was taken by preparing a panchnama in the presence of independent witnesses and their signatures were obtained on the panchnama. 19. A reading of the Khasra Girdawari and Jamabandis, copies of which have been placed on record, shows that actual and physical possession of the acquired land is still with the Appellants. Jamabandis relate to the year 2005-2006. Copies of notice dated 10/11.2.2011 issued by Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. relates to Appellant No. 1 - Prahlad Singh and this, prima facie, supports the Appellants' assertion that physical possession of the land is still with them. Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 have not placed any document before this Court to show that actual possession of the acquired land was taken on the particular date. Therefore, the High Court was not right in recording a finding that the acquired land will be deemed to have vested in the State Government. 20. The judgments, which have been referred to in the impugned order really do not have any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
