DABUR INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed praying that the entire proceedings commencing from notification dated 7.7.1984 issued under Section 4 (1) and the notification dated 9.7.1984 issued under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of petitioner's land be quashed. In the alternative, it is prayed that if the aforesaid prayer is not granted, a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to issue and serve notice under Section 9 of Land Acquisition Act and to pay compensation along with interest @ 18 per cent per annum.

(2.) The case set-up in writ petition is that the petitioner is owner of 12 bighas and 12 biswas of land situate In village Hasanpur Bhowapur, Pargana Lone. Tehsil Dadri district Ghaziabad. A notification dated 7.7.1984 was issued under Section 4 (1) of Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which was published in the Gazette on 9.7.1984. Thereafter, a declaration was made under Section 6 of the Act on 9.7.1984, which was published in the Gazette on 11.7.1984. The petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2493 of 1985 In the High Court for quashing of the aforesaid notifications in which a stay order staying dispossession of the petitioner was passed on 19.2.1985. The writ petition was, however, dismissed on 30.8.1988 by a detailed judgment. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Special Leave Petition No. 11438 of 1988 before the Supreme Court in which an order for maintaining status quo as on date was passed on 3.10.1988. The petitioner also filed a Civil Suit being O.S. No. 617 of 1989, Dabur India Ltd. v. Ghaziabad Development Authority, before the Civil Judge, Ghaziabad, where the main relief claimed was for injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the petitioner's possession over the land in dispute. The petitioner also moved an application for grant of an interim relief and the learned Civil Judge passed an order on 24.5,1989 directing the parties to comply with the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 3.10.1988 and to maintain status quo over the property in dispute till the decision of the suit. Subsequently, the petitioner moved an application for withdrawal of the Special Leave Petition No. 11438 of 1988 and the petition was dismissed as withdrawn by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 27.6.1991. Thereafter, the petitioner's counsel also made a statement in the court of Civil Judge that the petitioner does not want to continue with the suit and the same may be dismissed as not pressed and accordingly the suit filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 19.8.1991. It is averred in para 22 that no award has been made in respect of the petitioner's land till now though award with regard to other land covered by the same notification had been made on 27.9.1991, in paras 23 to 25, it is averred that the petitioner was not served with any notice under Section 9 of the Act. However, a notice dated 16.12.1995 purporting to be under Section 12 (2) of the Act was issued by Additional Collector/Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ghaziabad, stating that an award had been made on 27.7,1991 and it directed the petitioner to appear in Collcctorate Ghaziabad on 22.12.1995 to receive compensation but the notice was received by the petitioner on 28.12.1995. It is averred and pleaded in paras 27 and 28 of the writ petition that the petitioner is still in possession over the land in dispute and as no award had been made the proceedings for acquisition of land had lapsed under Section 11A of the Act.

(3.) A short counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Ghaziabad Development Authority (respondent No. 4), wherein, it is averred that after dismissal of the writ petition by the High Court on 30.8.1988, the possession of the acquired land was taken over by the Authority on 6.9.1988 and a possession memo was executed. After the acquisition proceedings had attained finality, the petitioner approached the Ghaziabad Development Authority with a request to allot part of the acquired land to it. The matter was considered in the meeting of the Board on 5.3.1991 and the request of the petitioner for allotment of 60 per cent of the acquired land was accepted upon the condition that the petitioner will withdraw the special leave petition filed before Hon'ble Supreme Court. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision of the Board, a communication clarifying the stand of the Authority was sent to the petitioner on 17.5.1991 and the rate of allotment of the land was finalised in the meeting of the Board held on 29.5,1991. Copies of these documents have been filed as Annexures-2. 3 and 4 to the counter-affidavit and the copies of five letters sent by the petitioner praying for allotment of land to it have been filed as Annexure-5 to the counter-affidavit. Thereafter, a communication was sent by the Authority on 25.9.1996 asking it to supply non-Judicial Stamp Paper of Rs. 4.02,570 and other documents for execution of the lease deed and a lease deed was actually executed in favour of the petitioner on 5.10.1996.