HARJIT SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a matter, which has arisen in the course of proceedings for acquisition of petitioners' land by issuance of Annexure P-2 notification dated 8.7.1988 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Annexure P-4, notification dated 4.7.1989 under Section 6 of the Act, and subsequent proceeding as the consequence of above notifications.

(2.) Principal Objection raised is, that since the notification under Section 6 dated 4.7.1989 was not published in terms of Section 6 at the spot, which is mandatory, hence it is liable to be quashed and in natural consequence all other subsequent proceedings are liable to be quashed.

(3.) Jumble of necessary facts, in order to determine the dispute are admitted i.e. notification Section 6 of the Act was issued in Government Gazette dated 4.7.1989. Though the petitioners have averred specifically that the substance of notification of declaration for acquisition under Section 6 of the Act was not published, in the locality, the respondent has not denied it in the short written statement filed rather in the course of arguments on our specifically asking about the stand of the respondent with respect to it, the respondent categorically admitted that the substances of notification under Section 6 of the Act with respect to declaration of acquisition was not published in the locality. It is settled that the publication of notifications in all the modes provided by the Act are mandatory and its non-compliance would result in acquisition bad in law despite of the knowledge of the petitioners with respect to the acquisition Act has to be done as joined by the statute. Doing it in any other manner would be impliedly barred. Thus, the notification under Section 6 of the Act is quashed on account of its non-publication in the locality.