RAJIV BERRY Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. C. Kandpal, J. 1. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents with regard to their land and sought the writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notification dated 4-5-2004 issued by the Government U/s 4 (1) as well as the notification dated 14-3-2005, issued U/s 6 of the Land Acquisi tion Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as the Act' ).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the land in question is situated within the mu nicipal limits of Dehradun and is located in extremely well developed urban area known and described as Rajpur Road. The land in question is bounded by Rajpur Road on one side, Subhash Marg on the other and Eucalyptus Road on the third side. The entire area where the land is situated is fully developed, consisting of Government Girls Inter College, Dehradun and other residential and commercial buildings which include general community facilities including wedding halls etc. The land in question is situated in the heart of the urban conglomeration of Dehradun city and all the land is under full urban use by the owners. In the year 2000, the new State of Uttaranchal was created and the State Reorganization Act, 2000 was promulgated and enforced by the Parlia ment. In pursuance of the creation of the new State, it was decided to accommo date part of the government activities and offices in the city of Dehradun provision ally and as an interim measure. Other important government institutions and offices, like the High Court etc. were ac commodated at Nainital. Dehradun is thus being used provisionally and temporarily as the capital of the State of Uttaranchal. The same description of Dehradun as pro visional capital, appears in the official records of the Home Ministry, Govt. of India, pertaining the State Reorganization. Accordingly all the perceived and projected needs and requirements of lands and buildings in and around Dehradun city would essentially have to be gauged and assessed keeping in mind the purely interim nature of such requirements, dependent upon the provisional status of the city of Dehradun as capital of Uttaranchal. It is also pleaded that near the land in dispute there is already situated the building and area currently accommodating the State Government Secretariat. The same is spread over a vast area of approximately more than two hectares. The Vidhan Sabha and other government buildings of the State are situated on the Haridwar Road; that the State Government has al ready acquired 500 acres of land along the Dehradun-Saharanpur Bye-pass Road adjacent to Vidhan Sabha and another 500 acres on the Sahasdhara Road; that all this land is available with the State Government and that this land is meant for the purpose of government buildings, including Vidhan Sabha, Government Secretariat etc.

(3.) THE petitioners also alleged that the I said notification U/s 4 of the Act was challenged before the High Court in terms I of writ petition No. 469 of 2004. This court vide order dated 30-10-2004 passed I the following order : "in these three writ petitions, particulary in writ petition No. 469 of 2004 I (M/b) and 874 O/2004 (M/b) the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act has been challenged. So also challenge is to the notification under section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act by applying the urgency clause. In writ petition no. 480 of 2004 (M/b), there is a common challenge to the notification which prouides for the acquisition of the land for extension of the Secretariat as also for the expansion of the road. THEse notifications are different. Mr. Sudhanshu Dhulia, Senior Advocate, in his usual fairness has shown readiness to hear the petitioners or as the case may be the persons interested, instead of going ahead with the urgency clause and more particularly dispensing with the enquiry under section 5-A. In view of the statement made, Mr. Naithani, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners with- draws the writ petitions, so far as challenge to the notification dated 5-5-2004 is concerned. In view of the urgency felt, we feel that it will be better for us to fix the programme. Public notice shall, therefore, be given within seven days from today inciting the objections. THE concerned Land Acquisition Officer, who is to hear the objection, shall-hear them within fifteen days/ All the objections shall be filed before the Land Acquisi tion Officer and life Land Acquisition Officer shall dispose of the matter one way or the other after giving full op portunity of hearing, etc. by Decem ber, 2004 or as the case may be ear lier thereto. With this, we dispose of writ petition no. 469 0f 2004/34 (M/b), 874 of 2004 (M/b) and partly writ petition no. 480 of 2004 (M/b)"