GHAZIABAD SHEROMANI SAHKARI AVAS SAMITI LIMITED & ANR. ETC. versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 203 · Decided: 31-01-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA, P.B. SAWANT, K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

. 
" 
l 
( 
• 
GHAZIABAD SHEROMANI SAHKARI AVAS SAMlTl 
LIMITED & ANR. ETC. 
v. 
StATE OF U.P. & ORS. ETC. 
JANUARY 3i, 1990 
[RANGANAtH MISRA; P.B. SAWANT AND 
K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.I 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: ss.4( 1) & 17( l)~Land acquired by 
cooperative housing societies prior to notificarion ill favour of 
Ghaziabad Development Authority-Validity of. 
The appellant cooperative societies consisting of 1739 low paid 
Government servants had acquired certain land in Ghaziabad for the 
purpose of providill!l residential nccommodatlon to their members. 
Subsequently, the said land was notified for acquisition under ss. 4(1) 
A 
c 
and l 7(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for the Ghaziabad Development b 
Authority. Representations made by the appellants under s. SA of the 
Act were rejected. 
In the writ petitions, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, it 
was contended for the appellant societies that the Development Autho• 
rity constituted by the State for the same purpose should not have been 
E 
permitted to acquire the said land to their prejudice, and that there was 
no justification for depriving them of their right to representation 
under s. 5A of the Act. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions. 
Allowing the appeals by special leave, the Court, 
HELD: I. The members of the appellant societies should not be 
denied residential accommodation for which they had taken effective 
steps before the acquisition for the Ghaziabad Development Authority 
was notified. [20SG I 
F 
2. l Keeping in \>lew the number of eligible members, the total G 
area which they had acquired aud entrusted to the socleiles for ron· 
struction, the capacity of the members to pay for the ronstructlon npw 
charged by the Development Authority, the n~d for planned de\>elop• 
ment of the Hrea and alt other relevant facts, It would be sufficient If 
each one of them was provided withanareaof80sq. yards. [20SG·H; 206A] 
203 
A 
B 
• 
204 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1990] 1 S.C.R. 
l..l. High rise construction for the poor sections of the society 
would not be convenient. If the double storey construction with an area 
of 80 sq: yards is adopted about 20 acres of land, inclusive of land for 
laying of the roads and other requirements contemplated under the 
development scheme, would be necessary. For convenience and adjust-
ment two more acres of land shall be made available to the societies to 
be shared by amicable adjustment by them. Thus, from the acquisition 
notification 22 acres of land shall stand deleted and shall be released 
inaccordance with the extent indicated for each of the societies. The 
identification of the land to be so released shall be made within four 
weeks from the date of pronouncement of the order by mutual arrange-
ments. The order of release bearing appropriate description to follow 
C 
and sketch maps to be signed by the parties. [206D; 207C-EJ 
D 
E 
F 
0 
3. The development charges for sewerage, electricity, road con-
nections and the like shall be provided to the Development Authority at 
the rate of Rs.100 per sq. yard and internal development shall be 
done by the societies themselves. In raising the construction, the 
bye-laws .an!l regulations of the Development Authority shall be stric-
tly followed. I 207G I 
· 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 992-
m ~~. 
I
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.8.1988 of the Allahabad 
High Court m W.P. Nos. 12572 of 1984, 65J2/85, U574/84, 17966/So. 
12152:'84 and 12159 of 1984. 
K.K. Venugopal, S.N. Misra, Rajinder Sachhar, Soli J. Sorab-
jee, V.M. Tarkunde, S.S. Ray, O.P .. Rana, Govind Mukhoti, P.C. 
Kapur, B.P. Sahu; P.N. Misra, Krishna Pd., B.P. Sin!ih, A.K. Goel,. 
J.M. Khanna, Ms. Shafali Khanna, S. Markandeya, Ashok Sharma, 
G.S. Giri Rao, Mrs. C. Markandeya, W:A. Nomani, G. Seshagiri, 
S.K. Mehta, Aman Vachher, Atul Nanda, N.D. Tyagi, Raju Rama-
charidran, D. Pillai, Raja Ram Agarwal, Sanjay Parekh, S.N. Mira 
and A.K. Goel for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court. was delivered.by 
r~
RANGANATH MISRA, J. We have heard counsel for the "'l
parties at considerable length but piece meal spread over a number of 
'I-I 
days. Special Leave grahted 
l 
SAHKARI AVAS SAMIT! v. STATE OF U.P. (MISRA, J.] 
205 
Five cooperative societies with membe;ship of Government 
servants mostly of· the lower strata filed six separate writ petitions 
before the Allahabad High Court_ challenging the Notification under 
section 4(1) and section 17(1) of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.