(1.) Respondent, Raja Ram Jaiswal moved Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 3174 of 1975 under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad questioning the validity of the Notification dated February 6, 1975 issued under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act ('Act' for short) as also a notice dated March 6, 1975 served upon him pursuant to the aforementioned notification The impugned notification was published in the U. P. Government Gazette dated February 15, 1975. By this impugned notification, land bearing Plot No. 62 approximately admeasuring 8265 sq. yds. was sought to be acquired as being needed for a public purpose namely for extension of Hindi Sangrahalaya of the Hindi Sahitya Sammellan Prayag. A substance of this notification was published in the locality where the land sought to be acquired is situate. On March. 22, 1975, a corrigendum dated March 13, 1.975 was published by which the impugned notification dated February 15, 1975 was to stand corrected by reading Plot No' 26 instead of 62 and the area sought to be acquired to be read as 2865 sq. yds. instead of 8265 sq. yds. After the publication of the corrigendum the petitioner sought amendment of the petition which was granted. Validity of the amended notification was challenged on diverse grounds. However, at the hearing of the petition, the challenge was confined to the following four grounds as summarised in the judgment of the High Court. They may be extracted
(2.) Respondent who was the original, petitioner but is the respondent in the appeal filed by the Collector will be referred to as the petitioner in this judgment.
(3.) Petitioner filed Special Leave Petition No. 9019 of 1980 against the same judgment contending that the High Court committed an error in rejecting the challenge to the validity of the impugned notification on the ground of legal mala fides as also on the ground of non-compliance with R. 4 of the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules. 1963.