M KISHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad, acquired an extent of Ac.14-16 guntas of land comprised in Sy.Nos.63, 64, 66/U, 66/5, 66/7, 66/9, 66/12, 66/14, 67 and 68 of Mansoorabad village, Hyderabad East, Ranga Reddy District, belonging to several persons, for the purpose of formation of Inner Ring Road from Tarnaka to Uppal Junction to join National Highway No.9. The petitioners herein own three plots bearing Nos.39, 49 and 50 in an extent of 1100 sq.yds., situated in Sy.No.64. Even before issuance of Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) on 18-5-1978, the Land Acquisition Officer, took possession of the acquired land on 6-11-1977. Thereafter, enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted on 5-6-1978 and Declaration under Section 6 of the Act, was made on 14-6-1979. When proceedings under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act were initiated and notices dated 17-9-1979 issued, one Smt. G. Veena Devi and three others, who own an extent of Ac.2.26 guntas of land in Sy.No.64, filed writ petition in W.P.No.6625 of 1979 questioning the said notices before this Court, and this Court by an order dated 10-10-1979, passed in W.P.M.P. No.8948 of 1979, stayed all further proceedings pursuant to the said notices. Subsequently, the said writ petition, by order dated 15-7-1992, was dismissed a having become infructuous. During the pendency of the said writ petition, save to the extent of the land covered by Sy.No.64, in respect whereof there was stay granted by this Court, the Land Acquisition Officer completed the award proceedings. Though the petitioners own three plots in an extent of 1100 Sq.yds. of land in Sy.No.64, they have not questioned the land acquisition proceedings, and there was no stay in respect of the said land. The Land Acquisition Officer, however, has not passed any award in respect of the land of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, as per the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short the amended Act), especially the provisions of Section 11-A, the Land Acquisition Officer, is required to complete the land acquisition proceedings within a period of two years from the date of publication of declaration, and inasmuch as no award has been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer within the time stipulated, in respect of the land of the petitioners, despite lapse of more than 20 years from the date of publication of declaration, the petitioners contend that the land acquisition proceedings in respect of their land, should be declared to have lapsed. So contending, the petitioners invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the following relief:

(2.) To declare the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondent and the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquisition of the land belonging to the petitioners, as having lapsed, and consequently to direct the respondent to initiate land acquisition proceedings afresh for acquisition of the said land and conclude the same expeditiously and to pay them compensation as per the prevailing market rate.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would contend that having regard to the provisions of the amended Act, particularly Section 11-A thereof, which came into effect from 24-9-1984, the land Acquisition proceedings are required to be completed within two years from the date of publication of declaration, and in case where the publication for declaration has been made prior to the commencement of the amended Act, the award shall be made within two years from the date of commencement of the amended Act, and the period of stay granted by the Court, if any, shall stand excluded, from computation of the two years period. The learned counsel further submits that in the instant case the publication of declaration was made on 14-6-1979 i.e. much prior to the amended Act coming into force on 24-9-1984, and this Court in the writ petition W.P. No.6625 of 1979, filed by one Smt. G. Veena Devi and three others, passed an order on 10-10-1979, granting stay of the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the land covered by Sy.No.64, and the said order of stay continued till 15-7-1982, the date on which the said writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous, and even though the petitioners are not party to the said writ petition proceedings, and even if the said period of stay granted by this Court in the said writ petition, is excluded from computing the period of two years, the respondent was required to conclude the acquisition proceedings by 14-7-1984. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that inasmuch as no award has been passed by the respondent within a period of two years, having regard to the provisions of the amended Act, the land acquisition proceedings should be declared as having lapsed, and directions should go to the Land Acquisition Officer to initiate fresh land acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of the petitioners.