SHYAMRAO RAJESHWARRAO POTDUKHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in each of the above petitions are owners of land situated at village Wadgaon, Tahsil and District Chandrapur. They are in possession of their respective lands. The respondent/State Government sought to acquire those lands by exercising powers under Section 41 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(2.) A notice dated 17th April, 1984 hence came to be published in the Official Gazette on 24th April, 1984. Individual notices to land holders and persons interested therein were alleged to have been served by the State Government. By this notice, the State Government called upon the persons whose names appeared in Column 5 of Part II of the Schedule, to show cause, if any, within a period of 30 days from the date of publication of the notice in the Official Gazette as to why the lands mentioned against their names in Part II of the Schedule should not be acquired for the purpose of construction of residential tenements under the Economically Weaker Section, Low Income Group, Middle Income Group and to undertake Area Development Scheme at the said village Wadgaon. Thereafter, the .State Government issued another notice dated 27th June, 1984 which was published in the Official Gazette on 12th July, 1984 as Corrigendum to the earlier notice dated 27th April, 1984. In this Corrigendum, Part II was substituted in place of Part II of the earlier notice dated 17th April, 1984 with the result that certain lands came to be excluded from acquisition. Again on 30th November, 1984 the State Government issued further corrigendum which came to be published on 14th December, 1984 in the Official Gazette cancelling its earlier Corrigendum dated 27th June, 1984 as a result of which lands which were excluded by that Corrigendum again came to be included for acquisition. Consequently, the first notice dated 17th April, 1984 was the one which remained in force. All the petitioners were then noticed to appear before the ex officio Secretary for personal hearing in the matter of objections that were raised by some of them. The hearing took place in the month of May, 1985. Ultimately, a final notification dated 20th February, 1986 for acquisition of lands was published on 20th March, 1986. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, both the notice dated 17th April, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the preliminary notice') and the final notifications dated 20th February, 1986 are challenged by the petitioners on various grounds.

(3.) THE petitioners claimed that neither the Authority nor the Board had prepared a draft scheme for housing. In the absence of any such scheme, it was not possible for the petitioners to effectively raise objection contemplated by proviso to Sub -section (1) of Section 41 of the Act. It was hence contended on behalf of the petitioners that they were denied the opportunity to show cause that the proposed acquisition of their lands was unreasonable, arbitrary and unwarranted. Mere bald statement that the proposed acquisition of land is for the purpose of constructing the tenements for economically weaker section, low and middle income group is not enough. The very purpose of giving opportunity to raise objections stands frustrated.