STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. ETC. versus PARSHOTTAMDAS RAMDAS PATEL & ORS.

Citation: [1988] 1 S.C.R. 997 · Decided: 12-11-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

--
\ 
-~ 
STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
PARSHOTTAMDAS RAMDAS PATEL & ORS. 
NOVEMBER 12, 1987 
A 
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.] 
B 
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 Section 2(q)(i)-
'Vacant land'-What is-Applicability of Act to 'land' which is subject 
matter of land Acquisition proceedings. 
The State Government of Gujarat-Appellant, issued a Notifica-
tion dated March 31, 1976 published in the Government Gazette dated 
April 8, 1976 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 
stating that the Lands of the respondents were likely to be needed for 
the public purpose of providing housing accommodation for the emp-
loyees of the Municipal Corporation, and that after making an enquiry 
under section S·A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the State Govern-
ment had issued a declaration under section 6 of the said Act declaring 
that the aforesaid lands along with other lands were needed for the said 
public purpose. 
In the meanwhile the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 
1976 came into force with effect from 17.2.1976. 
The respondents filed statements before the Competent Authority 
under section 6 of the 1976 Act including the lands to be acquired which 
were in excess of the ceiling limit which each of the respondents could 
retain after the coming into force of the 1976 Act. 
Thereafter, the respondents filed writ petitions contending that 
the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 
should be proceeded with and the acquisition proceedings to the extent 
it related to the surplus land under the ceiling law should be dropped. 
c 
D 
E 
F 
The applicability of the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and 
Regulation) Act, 1976 insofar as they were applicable within the limits 
G 
of the Municipal Corporation were questioned contending that: (i) the 
Act was beyond the legislative competence of Parliament insofar as tht 
State Government of Gujarat was concerned; (ii) that the lands in ques-
tion were not 'vacant lands' as defined in the Act and, therefore the 
proceedings instituted in respect of them under the Act were liable to be 
quashed, and (iii) that the land acquisition proceedings under the Land 
H 
997 
A 
B 
c 
998 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1988] I S.C.R. 
Acquisition Act 1894 which were initiated should be completed, and the 
Land Acquisition Officer should be directed to pass awards in favour of 
the respondents. These writ petitions were contested by the appel-
lants-State. 
The High Court though negativing the contentions of the respon-
dents regarding the legislative competence of Parliament to pass the 
Urban Land Act, quashed the proceedings instituted under the Act. It, 
however, declined to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing 
the Land Acquisition Officer before whom the proceedings were com-
menced under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as he was not made a 
party to the writ proceedings, but made a declaration that the land 
acquisition proceedings did not suffer from any infirmity. 
The State Government aggrieved by the judgment of the High 
Court filed Special Leave Petitions to this Court. 
D 
On the question whether; the lands of the respondents are lands to 
which the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 would apply. 
Allowing the Appeals, 
HELD: 1. The finding of the High Court that by virtue of sectkm 
E 
29(l)(a) of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 the lands fell outside the 
definition of 'vacant land' in the Urban Land Act, 1976 is unsustain-
able. The High Court omitted to notice that the owners were entitled to 
construct buildings on the lands after the permission was accorded by 
the local authority. [lOOSC] 
F 
2. The object of the Urban Land Act, 1976 is to provide for the 
G 
imposition of a ceiling on 'vacant land' in urban agglomerations for the 
acquisition. of such land in excess of the ceiling limit and to regulate the 
construction of buildings on such land and to bring about an equitable 
distribution of land iu urban agglomerations to subserve the common 
good. [lOOOG] 
3. The question whether a piece of land is a 'vacant land' or not 
does not depend upon the fact whether a prudent man would put up a 
building on that land or not after the issue of a notification under 
section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Nor a land will cease to 
be a 'vacant land' merely because the permission of certain authorities 
H is to be taken to put up a building thereon. [l006G-JJ] 
-~· 
! ·--.

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