VIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have sought to challenge the award passed pursuant to the notification dated 15.06. 90 and the entire proceedings of acquisition of lands bearing Khasra No.1 , situated at village Kolua Kalan of Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal, and other lands description of which has been given in the writ petition. It is mainly contended that the entire proceedings of acquisition are vitiated on the ground that the award was not passed within two years from the date of publication of the notification and declaration under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as 'Act') and that there was no case made out to exercise power under Section 17 of the Act. It is contended that appropriate opportunity of hearing was not granted to the petitioners and, therefore, such award was bad in law.

(2.) Briefly stated facts as given in the writ petition by the petitioners, for the purposes of deciding the controversy, are, that certain lands belonging to the petitioners were situated at village Kolua Kalan. It is contended that the use of lands in village Kolua Kalan, Narela Shakari, Damkheda of Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal, was agriculture. The villages are situated near about Bhopal city and are part of the Bhopal Urban Agglomeration. Sometime before 95, land use of village Kolua Kalan was changed to industrial and that of village Narela Shakari to residential, but in the revised plan of Bhopal Urban Agglomeration, the land use of village Kolua Kalan has been changed to be residential. It is contended that certain colonies have been developed in the said area not only by the State Government but by the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board also.

(3.) The respondent No.2, the Industries Department, made an application for acquisition of the land of village Samrakala, Narela Shakari, Damkheda and Kolua Kalan for the purposes of establishing the industrial area on the said land. Case No.4/A-82/89-90 was, thus, registered and the respondent No.2 was required to make an application for obtaining no objection certificate from the Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Bhopal. Though prior to making of the application for acquisition of the land, such no objection certificate was applied for by the respondent No.2 but same was not issued. Even when the matter was considered by the respondent No.3, for initiating the proceedings for acquisition of the land aforesaid for the purpose of making it available to respondent No.2, no objection certificate from the Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Bhopal was not produced. Even when a peremptory order was issued directing respondent No.2 to obtain such a no objection certificate, the Land Acquisition Officer, the Collector, Bhopal, inspected the spot, took a complete somersault and made a reference to the Commissioner, Bhopal Division, seeking permission to invoke emergency powers under Section 17(1) of the Act for the purposes of acquisition of the land in dispute.