ZAHID HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have sought to quash the Notification Under Section 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act) appended as Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition and , also for issuance of mandamus commanding the respondents to allot 10% developed land in consonance with the land having been so acquired.

(2.) IT appears that a notification was issued under Section -1 of the Act on 7.9.1999, while declaration under Section 6 was issued on 31.01.2000. The land acquired situates in Village Mangoopura, district Moradabad. Notice under Section 9 of the Act was issued on 06.03.2000 and possession of the land was taken on 06.11.2000. It also appears that the petitioners filed applications before the Collector, Moradabad -respondent no.2 on 14.08.2012 invoking his powers under Section 6 Sub Clause(1) of U.P. Land Acquisition Rules, 1997. It is mainly contended that award could not be made even after statutory period of two years as provided under Section 11 of the Act, then some of the land owners approached this Court by preferring Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37449 of 2003 (Jaswant Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others) and thereafter, due to the intervention of the Court, award was made on 27.8.2004. Total land measuring 175.444 hectare had been the subject matter of said acquisition proceeding which has been taken over by Moradabad Development Authority on the basis of mutual agreement and through sale deeds. It is also not disputed that the petitioners have received compensation in pursuance of the award made on 27.08.2004.

(3.) THE main contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that publication of the Notification under Section 4(1) read with Section 17 of the Act had been effected on 31.01.2000 while the award with respect to the said acquired land under Section 11 of the Act had been pronounced by the respondent no.3 on 17.8.2004 i.e. explicitly after a lapse of approximately four years and seven months which is in contravention of the provisions enumerated under Section 11 of the Act which provides that the Collector shall make an award under Section 11 of the Act w.e.f date of Notification under Section 6 of the Act within a period of two years from the date of publication of the award and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceeding for acquisition of land shall lapse . It is further contended that the acquired land was handed over to Moradabad Development Authority by erstwhile land owners not out of their independent free wish but as a matter of fact, it was parted under pressure andh influence so exercised upon them by the Moradabad Development Authority. Per contra , learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents has denied the arguments by saying that the compensation of the land has been accepted by petitioners and the possession of the same had also been taken , hence the acquisition proceedings challenged in this writ petition in the garb of the notification is not maintainable. He has referred the decision given in the case of Sowaika Property (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Raj.) and others, 2008 4 SCC 695. The Hon'bl;e Apex Court has observed in para -6 of the decision as under: