INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. MADAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have four appeals before us in which Indore Development Authority is the common appellant. For the purpose of implementing the Town Development Scheme No. 72, the Development Authority acquired lands belonging to the respondents. The validity of the acquisition was called into question by way of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The legality of the Town Development Scheme No. 72 was also challenged. The High Court has accepted the writ petitions and quashed the acquisition. The Development Authority has appealed to this Court by obtaining special leave.

(2.) The facts are substantially undisputed and may be stated as follows. On 16 March 1973, M.P. Nagar Thatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 ("Adhiniyam') was brought into force. Prior to that date, there was in force an Act called M. P. Town Improvement Trust Act, 1960 ("The Trust Act'). Under the Trust Act, the Indore Improvement Trust was constituted. The Indore Improvement Trust framed a Town Expansion Scheme No. 72 under the provisions of the Trust Act. It invited objections from persons whose lands were proposed to be acquired for executing the scheme. Some persons filed objections and suggestions and they were considered. The Improvement Trust by itself had no authority to approve the scheme. It must obtain sanction of the State Government. Accordingly, the Government was approached for grant of sanction to the scheme in question. Section 50 of the Trust Act provides that when the Government is approached for sanction, the Trust shall cause notice of that fact to be published for two consecutive weeks in the Gazette and in the local newspaper. Section 51 of the Trust Act empowers the State Government either to sanction the scheme with or without modifications or to refuse the sanction or to return the scheme for reconsideration by the Improvement Trust. Section 52(1) of the Trust Act provides that whenever the State Government sanctions an improvement scheme; it shall be notified and Section 52(2) provides that the publication of such a notification shall be conclusive evidence that the scheme has been duly framed and sanctioned.

(3.) But the Government in the instant case could not grant sanction to Scheme No. 72 in view of the subsequent development. On 17 January 1977, the Improvement Trust forwarded the Scheme to the Government with objections and suggestions it has received. When the scheme was pending consideration, the Development Authority under the Adhiniyam was established. It was established on 13 July, 1977 and consequently the Trust Act stood repealed and the Improvement Trust was replaced. That were the statutory consequences under Section 87(1)(c)(ii) of the Adhiniyam. The Government was thus deprived of its power to accord sanction to the scheme No. 72.