LexSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. versus JAIPAL SINGH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.
v.
JAIPAL SINGH AND ORS.
AUGUST 14, 1996
B
(K. RAMASWAMY AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.]
Lalld Acquisitioll Act, 1894 : Sections 4 & 23.
Lalld Acquisition-Notification foi-Challellge to llotification
C grozt1uis-T7wt there was policy decisioll to exclude from acquisitioll lands oil
which buildillgs have been constructeii-Lalldowners' claim that they have
collstructed shops before notification-Notificatioll quashed by High
Court-Appeal-Held there is llO gelleral policy that all "fallds on which
collstruction has come would be excluded from acquisition---But admissioll
made across the bar that Govemmellt had decided to release from acquisitioll
D certaill lands situated oil Sharja plall-No material Oil record for idelltifica-
tion of landowners' la1uf-Directioll for identification of lands-Held if lands
are located on exempted area they shall be released from acquisition-In case
their lands are outside exempted area enquiry should be made whether shops
were collstructed p1ior to 11otification zt11der sectioll 4(1}-lf so they would be
E entitled to compe11sation in accorda11ce with section 23(1) otheiwise they
would llOI be e11titled for compellsatioll.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11052 of
1996.
F
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.2.92 of the Punjab &
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 6804 of 1991.
Prem Malhotra for the Appellants.
D.S. Tewatia, Ranbir Yadav and Ms.· Madhu Tewatia for the
G Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Delay condoned.
H
Leave granted.
706
-
STATE v. JAIPALSINGH
707
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
Notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 {for
short, the 'Act') was published on January 23, 1990 acquiring a large extent
of the land for urbanisation and commercial purpose in Sectors No. 4A
A
and 6 of Daruhera and Malpura Village in District Rewari. The respon-
B
dents challenged the validity of the notification in the High Court on two
grounds. Firstly, that there was a policy of the Government to exclude from
acquisition the lands on which buildings have been constructed and
secondly, the respondents had constructed shops before notification under
Section 4(1) was published and, therefore, their land is liable to be ex-
cluded from the notification. The High Court in the impugned order made C
in Writ Petition No. 6804/91 on February 11, 1992 recorded a finding that
the respondents had constructed the shops prior to the issue of the
notification. There was general policy to exclude from acquisition the
built-in areas. Therefore, it was held that they are liable to be excluded.
The notification was quashed.
D
We have repeatedly held in several judgments that there is no general
policy as such that all the lands on which construction has come to be made
are required to be deleted from the acquisition. But it was admitted across
the Bar that a decision was taken not to acquire that A.B.C.D. land. The
respondents placed on record the proceedings of the Director, Department E
of Urban Estate. Haryana in the letter dated February 12, 1992 wherein it
was stated that the Government had decided to release the land to the west
of line marked A.B.C.D. on the Sharja Plan sent to the Land Acquisition
Officer. Accordingly, direction was given to the Land Acquisition Officer
to take action to delete such of those lands within that area and submit a F
detailed report in that behalf.
When we enquired from the counsel for the respondents to point out
after locating the lands whether they are situated within the A.B.C.D. line
marked on the Shajra Plan, the learned counsel with difficulty sought to G
place before us the identific"tion and localisation of the land. But on the
basis of scant material on record, we think that it would be hazardous for
us to conclude whether or not the lands are existing within the aforesaid
Jemarked Shajra Plan. Appropriate course would be that the respondents
should make an application before the Secretary to Government, Haryana,
Urban Estate Department, Haryana Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh within a H
708
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.
A
period of 4 weeks from today giving the details of the location, whereat
the lands are factually existing. The Secretary would have an enquiry made
through either the Urban Estates Department or Land Acquisition Officer,
as the case may be, or any appropriate authoExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.