LexAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR. versus AHMEDABAD GREEN BELT KHEDUT MANDAL & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
• [2014] 11 S.C.R. 855 AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR. A v. AHMEDABAD GREEN BELT KHEDUT MANDAL & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos.1542-44 of 2001) MAY 9, 2014 [DR. 8.S. CHAUHAN, J. CHELAMESWAR AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] B Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 - ss. 40(3)(jj)(iv) and 20(2) - Re-acquisition u/s. C 40(3)(jj)(a) for Town Planning Scheme - Of the land which was de-reserved u/s. 20(2) after its acquisition for development plan - Permissibility of re-acquisition of such land - Held: The development plan and Town Planning Scheme, both are two different things - Hence, re-acquisition D of d.e-reserved land, under Town Planning Scheme is permissible - In such acquisition provisions of Land Acquisition Act, would riot be applicable - Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Interpretation of Statutes - Individual hardship cannot be a ground to strike down a statutory provision by not giving effective meaning to every word of the provision, language whereof is unequivocal. Disposing of the matters, the Court E F . HELD: 1.1. The High Court has recorded an erroneous finding that if a designation lapses under Section 20 of Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976, the land cannot be again G reserved in a town planning scheme, and that if the land cannot be acquired under Section 20 for want of capacity to pay any compensation under the Land Acquisition Act 1894, it cannot be allowed to be acquired indirectly on 855 H 856 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 11 S.C.R. A lesser payment of compensation as provided under the Act 1976. [para 39] [890-G] I 1.2. The town planning scheme provides for pooling the entire land covered by the scheme and thereafter re- B shuffling an.d reconstituting of plots, the market value of the original plots and final plots is to be assessed and authority has to determine a·s to whether a land owner has suffered some injury or has gained from such process. Re- constitution of plots is permissible as provided under the scheme of the Act as is evident from cogent reading of C Section 45(2)(a)(b)(c) and Section 52(1)(iii) in accordance with Section 81 of the Act 1976. By re-constitution of the plots, if anybody suffers injury, the statutory .Provisions provide .for compensation under Section 67(b) read with Section 80 ofthe Act 1976. By this re-constitution and D readjustment of plots, there is no vesting of land in the local authority and therefore, the Act provides for payment of non-monetary compensation. When the scheme comes into force all rights in the original plots are extinguished, and simultane_ously therewith ownership springs in the re- E constituted plots. It does not predicate ownership of the plots in. t.he local authority, and no _process - actual or notional ~of transfer is contemplated in that appropriation. Thus, in case a land-owner is not pr-0vided with a final plot, amount of his loss would be payable to him as required u/ F s. 84 of 1976 Act. The provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would not be applicable. [paras 23 and 25] [881-E-H; 882-A, E-F] I • I State of Gujarat vs. Shanti/al Mangaldas AIR 1969 SC G 634 - followed, H + Maneklal Chhotalal vs. · M. G. . Makwana 1967 AIR 1373:1967 SCR 65; Prakash Amichand Shah vs. State of Gujarat and Ors. AIR 1986 SC 468: .1985 (3) Suppl. SCR 1025 - relied on • • AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. AHMEDABAD 857 GREEN BELT KHEDUT MANDAL Rustom Cavasjee Cooper vs. Union of India AIR 1970 A SC 564: 1970 (3) SCR 530; P.. Vajravelu Mudaliar vs. The Special Deputy Collector for Land Acquisition, West Madras andAnr. AIR 1965 SC 1017: 1965 SCR 614; Union of India vs. The Metal Corporation of India and Anr. AIR 1967 SC 637: 1967 SCR 255 -·stood overruled. B lshwari Khetan Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. etc .etc. vs. The State of U. P. and Ors. AIR 1980 SC 1955: 1980 (3) SCR 331; State of West Bengal vs. Mrs. Bella Banerjee and Ors. AIR 1954 SC 170: 1954 SCR 558 - referred to. c 1.3. Section 40(3)(jj) only regulates discretion of the Area Development Authority (ADA) while making the draft development plan. The land acquired under Section 20 read with Section 12 of the Act 1976 would need infrastructural facility and the original plot which is D acquired would require to be re-constituted as a final plot and to make a building site. The provisions of the· Act have to be read as a whole and therefore the provision of Section 40(3)(jj)(a)(
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.