BRIJ BHUSHAN GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR the planned Industrial Development in district Mathura through the Uttar Pradesh State, Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., Kanpur, the Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a Notification dated 14-10-1988 under section 4 read with section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act (here-in-after referred to as the Act). This Notification was published in the U. P. Gazette Extra Ordinary on 15-10-1988 and was also published in two Daily news papers of Hindi on 12-11-1988 and 30-11-1988. By this Notification large number of plots including three plots of the petitioner were proposed to be acquired for the aforesaid purpose. As the Government was of the opinion that the provisions of section 17 (I) of the Act were applicable to the said land, as it was required urgently for the Planned Industrial Development in district Mathura, it directed to dispense with the inquiry under section 5-A of the Act. The Government, on 1-4-1989 issued the Notification under section 6 of the Act. Thereafter notices were issued to the petitioner on 19-6-1989.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the Notification dated 14-10-1988 under section 4, Notification dated 1-4-1989 under section 6 and notices dated 19-6-1989 under section 9 (3) of the Act. THE petitioner has primarily challenged the Notification under section 4 of the Act on the ground that inquiry under section 5-A of the Act should not have been dispensed with, as it was not a case of urgency. THE petitioner has supported this argument on the following three grounds ; (i) correspondence and negotiation before the Notification under section 4 of the Act, (ii) gap of time between the Notifications under sections 4 and 6 of the Act and (iii) Planned Industrial Development is an ordinary purpose, and as such section 17 (4) of the Act should not be applied.

(3.) SO far as the third argument to the effect that the Planned Industrial Development cannot be said to be the public purpose, which required urgent action is concerned, it also lacks force. Unemployment is increasing day by day and position is becoming acute and unless State can quickly provide avenues for employment the whole social order might be adversely affected. Establishment of Industries is one of the important means for providing employment to the people. Industrial development, as such, is one of the public purposes, which are to be executed with utmost urgency so as to provide opportunities for employment and reduce the social tension in the society. A Division Bench of this court in the case of Rajbali v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1983 Alld. 78, has upheld dispensing of the inquiry under section 5-A of the Act for the purposes of Planned Industrial Development by holding that general interest of the public requires industrial development to be made so that not only some of the people living there are given employment but also their living standard may be upgraded. Thus, the Government was fully justified in applying the provisions of section 17 (4) of the Act and thereby dispensing with the inquiry under section 5-A of the Act.