GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment with dispose of C.W. P Nos 529, 560 and 792 of 1980 under Article 226 of the Constitution as the same notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter to be called the Act) are sought to be quashed by issuance of writ of certiorari. For facility of reference, facts as adverted to in C. W. P. No. 529 of 1980 may be briefly narrated. A notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 6th January 1978(P-1) was published in the Punjab Government Gazette on 20th January, 1978, by which land situated in villages Udhekaran, Chak Bir Sarkar and Muktsar were to be acquired for a public purpose namely for construction of a byepass at Muktar in Faridkot District. According to the same, objections in writing could be lied by the interested persons with in 30 days before the Land Acquisition Collector. This was followed by another notification under Section 6 of the Act (P-2) which was published on 26th October, 1079. The legality of these two notification has been challenged in his writ petition on behalf of six petitioner whose lands are also included therein.

(2.) According to the averments in the petition and the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, substance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act was not published in the locality concerned not was the copy of the notification pasted anywhere as required under Section 4 of the Act. The petitioners came to know from the patwri of Halqa Bhullar that a report about the proclamation relating to the notification had been recorded in his Roznamcha on February 2, 1978. The copy of the same in English translation is P-3 annexed with the petition. In the said report substance of the notification as alleged to be proclaimed is not disclosed. It is the case of the petitioners that even according to the report in the Roznamcha (P-3) substance of the notification was published in the locality after 13 days and as such in view of a Full Bench decision of this Court in Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab 1976 Pun LJ 356: (AIR 1976 Punj 279) the impugned notification under Section 4(p-1) is liable to be quashed as it was mandatory on the authorities concerned to publish the substance of the notification in the locality concerned simultaneously with the publication of the same in the gazette or at least immediately there after the and the delay in doing the needful was required to be explained satisfactorily. It was also urged by the learned counsel or the petitioner that in Murari Lal Bhargave V. State of Hariana 1977 Pun LJ 398, a Division Bench of this Court quashed a notification under Section 4 of the Act even when there was delay of only six days in the publication of its substance which had not been explained.

(3.) According to the learned State counsel this delay of 13 days in publication of the substance has been satisfactorily explained in the additional affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2. However the explanation given therein is to the effect that after publication of the notification in the Government gezette on 20th January, 1978, the same was received in the office of the Land Acquisition Collector respondent No. 2 after four days i. e., 24th January 1978. Another three days were spent in preparing typed copies of the notification and a notice under Section 5-A which were sent of the Naib Tahsildar Land Acquisition, Amritsar, on 27th January, 1978. Even thereafter, according to the report in the Roznamcha of the patwari, the proclamation was got done in the village by beat of drum through a Chowkidar on 2nd February, 1978. The report in the Roznamcha does not make mention of the details of land which had been acquired. The reference is only to the notification dated 20th January 1978. Nor does it disclose if the copy of the notification or its substance had been pasted on any building in the locality concerned.