APPA GANPATI JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by the present petition challenge the notification under Section 4 and declaration under section 6 of the LAND acquisition ACT, 1894 under the provisions of the maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rehabilitation Act") for resettlement of displaced persons of Urmodi Project in village Atit, Taluka and District Satara. It is the case of the petitioner that after receipt of notice under Section 4 (1) , objections were raised by filing reply and documents were also relied upon. The respondent after considering the objections raised and documentary evidence produced by the petitioner was pleased to observe that out of Gate No. 1243 only H 1 R 23 land be acquired and H 2 R 11 be dropped from acquisition. The case of the petitioner is that he came to know about the declaration dated 20th March 1998 as it was published in Daily Aikya on 6th April 1998. The said declaration also specified that the respondent-State has decided to invoke the urgency clause under Section 17 of the land acquisition ACT, 1894. The case of the petitioner further is that the emergency clause could not be invoked without first issuing notice under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act. Apart from that it is contended that there is no urgency.

(2.) The challenge to the notice under Section 4 (1) and declaration under Section 6 of the Act is on the ground that the respondents, prior to issuance of the same, have not complied with the mandatory provisions of Sections 13 to 13 of the Rehabilitation Act. The respondents without specifying which slab of Part II of the Schedule of the rehabilitation Act is made applicable in the benefited and affected zone in respect of Urmodi project, could not initiate the acquisition proceedings under the Land acquisition Act. It is pointed out that the compulsory acquisition of land as provided under Section 14 (2) of the rehabilitation Act is for the benefit of the rehabilitated persons to be displaced by the project. The respondent cannot without compliance with the procedure as laid down under Section 13 of the Act initiate any acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. The notification and declaration under the LAND acquisition ACT, 1894 have been issued without complying with the provisions of section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is further contended that no public notice was given by the respondents as required under Section 13 (1) of the rehabilitation Act specifying the areas of affected and benefited areas and also not specifying which slab of Part II of the Schedule is made applicable. The respondent no. 1, it is contended* must assess firstly as to which land is available for the purpose of acquisition under Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act and until that is done -proceedings under the LAND acquisition ACT, 1894 cannot be initiated. The acquisition of land for operation of the Rehabilitation scheme are applicable as soon as notification is issued under section 11 of the Act. It is also painted out that the resettlement Act, 1976 has been repealed after coming into force of the Rehabilitation Act, 1986. Reference is made to section 26 of the Rehabilitation Act. The effect of non compliance of the procedure contemplated under Section 13 of the Rehabilitation Act, it is pointed out goes to the root of the matter and consequently the notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 are liable to be set aside.

(3.) It is also contended that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to challenge the declaration made in respect of village Atit more so when the petitioner and other villagers of the village have spent substantial amounts by taking loans on their lands for implementation of various irrigation schemes and at present the entire village Atit is well irrigated and does not require water from Urmodi project after its completion. Reference is then made to several dates which may be set out as under: the notification under Section 11 of the Project displaced Persons Act, 1976 was issued on 2/7/1981, The notification under Section 4 of the LAND acquisition ACT, 1894 was issued on 14/7/-97. Notice to the petitioner was issued on 10/10/97. The declaration under Section 6 was made on 25/3/98 and published on 6th April 1998 in Daily Aikya.