KIRAN DEVI AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in this case is about the denotification made under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1894) and thereafter the review made by impugned order dated 27.01.2005 which is under challenge. The legality and propriety of such review order calling back orders and denotification order u/s 48 of the Act of 1894 are subject matters of adjudication.

(2.) The facts, as pleaded, are that on 12.06.1989 a proposal was sent by the Executive Engineer of the M.P. Housing Board, Raipur (as it was the then erstwhile Madhya Pradesh) for acquisition of land ad- measuring 35.034 hectares situated at village Sondongri. The subject land in this case is Khasra No.613/128 & 613/163 ad- measuring 1.190 hectares & 0.118 hectares respectively. In respect of part and parcel of such land subject of acquisition, on 11.1.1990, the original owner Hitendra Kothari executed a sale of land bearing Kh. No.613/163 in favour of petitioner No.4 Smt. Meena Dholakia. Likewise on 02.02.1990, a registered sale deed was executed by Smt. Daksha Kothari in favour of petitioner No.3 Smt. Kalpana Dholakia of Kh. No. 613/128. Subsequent to such purchase made, the Housing Board proposed to acquire the land and on 25.04.1990, the Commissioner Raipur Division granted permission to invoke section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquisition of huge part of land including the aforesaid Khasra numbers. Consequent thereto, a notification on 25.05.1990 u/s 4(1) of the Act, 1894 and the declaration u/s 6 read with notification 17(1) of the Act 1894 was published. The said notifications were published in the daily newspaper Amrit Sandesh on 08.06.1990 and 09.06.1990 respectively. Thereafter, the publication of advertisement was made under section 9 (1) & (2) of the Act, 1894 and the objections were invited. The petitioners submitted their objections on 27.8.1990, however, eventually the award was passed on 05.08.1991 (Annexure P-4).

(3.) The petitioners contend that though the award was passed on 05.08.1991 but the actual physical possessions of the lands were not taken from them. It is stated that the petitioners had raised the superstructure over the land and when the Housing Board on 13.05.1999 tried to demolish the boundary wall made over the land, it led to filing of FIR on 30.05.1999 and the possession was eventually not surrendered. Subsequently, an application was filed u/s 48 of the Land Acquisition Act by Petitioners 3 & 4. Thereafter, nothing transpired on the application and in the meanwhile on 01.11.2000, the State of Chhattisgarh came into being. Subsequently on 27.12.2000 vide Annexure P-8, a report was submitted by the Tahsildar in a revenue case. It is pleaded that the Tahsildar affirmed the fact that the physical possession of the land is held by the Petitioners 3 & 4. It is on this back ground, again a fresh application under section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act was filed by the petitioners on 05.03.2001. Since no decision was rendered on repeated application filed u/s 48 of the Act, it led to filing of W.P.No.1089 of 2001 before High Court and the High Court thereafter vide order dated 09.4.2003 (Annexure P-12) directed the State of Chhattisgarh to decide the application filed u/s 48 of the Act. which was pending consideration.