HIRALAL CHAWLA & ANR. versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 325 · Decided: 13-02-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

t· 
HIRALAL CHAWLA & ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. 
FEBRUARY 13, 1990 
. [RANGANATH MISRA, M.M. PUNCHHI AND 
S.C. AQRAWAL, JJ.] 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4( J)~NOIDA~Lan4 
acquired by cooperative housing societies prior to notification in favour 
of Development Authority-Validity of. 
Certain cQOperative housi!lg societies comprismg of the peti, 
tioners a11d others !tad acquired lands in the tra!1S·J8J11Una area Of 
Uttar Pradesh prior to the setting up of the New Okhla I11dustrial 
Development Authority in 1976. When the said lands came to be 
notified for the Development Authority writ petitions were filed in 1983 
under Article 32 of the Constitution for quashing the acquisition. In its 
order dated January 14, 1985 the Court had directed the Authority to 
hand over actual possession of plots to allottees involved in the dispute. 
Since a dispute had arisen as to the eligibility of a large number of 
applicants who had failed to keep to the time schedule in the matter of 
payment the Court in its interim order dated September 2, 1983 had 
directed the Authority to reserve 269 acres of land in addition to the 
land already allotted. The petitioners in the instant case belorig to this 
category. 
The total number of persons entitled to allotment has been 
cjetermined at 2,380. The Authority's scheme for the petitioners had 
stipulated four sizes of plots viz. 112.5 sq. metres, 162 sq. metres, 202.5 
sq. metres and 250 sq. metres. They, therefore, claimed an area of 130 
acres out of the 269 acres set apart for them. The Authority, however, 
sought to reduce this area to 90 acres and the plot area to 77. 73, 112.3, 
140.45 and 173.53 sq. metres respectively. 
Disposing of the petitions, the Court. 
A 
D 
E 
F 
G 
HELD: If the scaling down from 130 acres to 90 acres is to be 
done the plots are bound to he of odd sizes and working out may be 
difficult. Therefore, instead of 90 acres of land the total area to be 
released on that account should be 96.29 acres and the different sizes of 
plots as provided in tJte scheme shall stand reduced to 100 sq. metres, H 
325 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
326 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1990] 1 S.C.R. 
130 sq. metres, 150 sq. metres and 180 sq. metres respectively. 71 
decimals of land should also be set apart for the other applicants being 
dealt with separately. The plots are to be developed by the Authority in 
accordance with the norms laid down, and allotted within a period of 
nine months beginning from 1st of March, 1990. [329H-330F, 331F] 
Prices have gone up in every sphere. To bind the Authority by the 
terms of its scheme. at this point of time would not at all be fair. These 
2,380 persons have already deposited huge amounts of money said to be 
about five crores of rupet's with the Authority and the money has been 
held on account without u,tilisation, as no final decision had been taken. 
The current rate per square metre is Rs.1,200. Taking into considera-
tio.n the fact that the members have waited too long for allotment of 
their plots, the Authority should be permitted to charge Rs.1,000 per 
square metre. Every member who has deposited any sum of money with 
the Authority against proposed allotment shall be entitled to 12% 
interest on such amount from the date of deposit till the actual allotment 
and such interest accrued in favour of the person shall be entitled to 
adjustment against actual price of land to be worked out@ Rs.1,000 per · 
square metre. Balance amount, if any, shall have to be paid by every 
person included in the figure of 2,380 within three months from the date 
of the order in monthly instalments. Failure to pay any of the instal· 
ments within the time limit indicated shall disqualify· such person from 
allotment. The terms in regard to allotment for the remaining few 
persons shall also be the :1ame. {330G-331E] 
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 975 of 1986. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia). 
F 
D.D. Thakur, V.C. Mahajan, S. Markandaya, G.S. Rao, 
Sreepal Singh and Ms. Kusum Chowdhary for the Petiticmers. 
R N. Trivedi, S.C. Batra and Raju Ramachandran for the 
Respondents. 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RANGANATH MISRA, J. The dispute in this group of writ 
petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution relates to allotment of 
land for residential purposes by New Okhla Industrial Development 
Authority (shortly known as 'NOIDA'). NOIDA is a trans-Jamuna 
H 
housing project set up by the Uttar Pradesh

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.