ESSEX FARMS P LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this application the Petitioner seeks leave to amend the petition by incorporating therein subsequent facts and events viz. the Declaration dated 25.9.1990 issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and Award No. 3/93 dated 22.5.1992. The delay in filing this application has not been properly explained. Furthermore, the Petitioner ought to have placed on record the amended writ petition. We have, however, not insisted on compliance with this formality since it would have unduly delayed the final determination of the writ petition, and would have resulted in a monumental waste of the time of this Court. The writ petitions have been heard on all aspects of the case. In these circumstances the application is allowed, subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- as costs, to be shared equally by Shri Poddar and Ms. Takiar, learned counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) The Petitioner has prayed for the quashing of the Notification dated 19.2.1990 and the entire acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land commonly known as Essex Farms. On 8.6.1990 this Court had restrained the Respondents from "taking possession of the land of the Petitioner bearing Khasra Nos. 127, 128, 131 and 286/133 measuring 11 bighas 12 biswas situated in the revenue estate of village Kalu Serai, Delhi" (hereinafter referred to as "Essex Farms"). These interim orders were subsequently made absolute. The Notification, Annexure P-IX, reads as follows: DELHI ADMINISTRATION : DELHI (LAND and BUILDING DEPARTMENT) NOTIFICATION Dated : 19-2-1990 No.F.9(5)/79-LandB (i) :- Whereas it appears to the Lt. Governor, Delhi that the land is likely to be required to be taken by Govt. at the public expense for a public purpose, namely for Planned Development of Delhi i.e. Shopping Centre and widening of Mehrauli Road, it is hereby notified that the land in the locality described below is likely to be required for the above purpose. This notification is made under the provisions of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, to all whom it may concern. In exercise of the powers conferred by the aforesaid section, the Lt. Governor, Delhi is pleased to authorise the officer for the time being engaged in the undertaking with their servants and workmen to enter upon and survey any land in the locality and do all other acts required or permitted by that section. The Lt. Governor being of the opinion that provisions of sub-section (1) of section 17 of the said Act are applicable to this land, is further pleased under sub-section 4 of the said section to direct that the provisions of section 5-A shall not apply. <FRM>KT_886_ILRDLH_2007.htm</FRM> By Order Sd/- ( V. RAMNATH) SPECIAL SECRETARY (L and B) DELHI ADMINISTRATION : DELHI

(3.) In the writ petition it has been asseverated that the Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and that it is conducting its business from Essex Farms for the last fifty years, which was initially notified for acquisition for public purpose vide Notification dated 13.11.1959 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the "Planned Development of Delhi". This Notification was followed-up by a Declaration dated 11.1.1969 issued under Section 6 of the Act. It has been asserted that, by virtue of the amended provisions contained in Section 11-A of the Act as introduced into the statute in 1984, these actions would automatically lapse should the Land Acquisition Collector fail to publish an Award on or before 23.9.1986. The Petitioner alleges that the Delhi Administration had issued instructions to the Deputy Commissioner of Delhi not to acquire lands which are fully built-up and for this reason, after conducting a joint survey it was recommended that the said land be released from acquisition proceedings, which was so done on 23.9.1986. It is further contended that despite the fact that the land had remained under acquisition for about 27 years the Respondents had issued the impugned Notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Act thereby nullifying and taking away the statutory right of the Petitioner to file objections under Section 5A of the Act. It is asserted in the petition that the Lt. Governor had not adequately applied his mind while issuing a Notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Act and that in any event the "Planned Development of Delhi (PDD)" is not a purpose which justifies invocation of Section 17 of the Act. The Notification is challenged as being a colourable exercise of power, having been issued without application of mind, with malafide intentions and ulterior motives. The Petitioner's protestation is that various other properties constructed alongside the existing road, namely, Aurobindo Marg, and in alignment with Essex Farms land have not been acquired. So far as the creation of a Shopping Centre is concerned the petitioner alleges that a number of such establishments have already come into existence in the environs, thus satiating this need.