BALKRISHNA SHANTARAM DHUME Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WOULD the exemption of 2250 hectares of surplus vacant land in a housing scheme framed by the State Government under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 be in public interest? Such is the essential controversy raised by these two public interest petitions. Common questions of fact and law arise, A consolidated judgment.

(2.) THE petitions also challenge a scheme framed by the Central Government under Section 21 of the Act. That challenge was however not pressed in the present petitions as indicated by my order dated January 8, 1985.

(3.) REGARDING the first ground of challenge, the only thrust of learned Counsels' arguments regarding the validity of the scheme, pertained to the sale of as many as 2,25,000 tenements by the land -holders/builders in the open market without any price control. That, they say will not ensure for the beneficiaries of the scheme, namely the weaker section of the society but for the aggrandisement of the land -holders/builders. Hence not in public interest. Needless to say, if that is accepted the other challenges must become academic.