LAXMI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, MANESAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the permission for change of land use/licence/NOC/any other permission granted once, would grant immunity to the said land for all times to come, from its acquisition by the State under the applicable Land Acquisition Act (In the present case, it is land Acquisition Act 1894), even if it is required for the "Public Purpose", is the question posed before us to answer in the instant civil writ petition.

(2.) The genesis of the instant case lies in the era of Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as 1894 Act) which is commonly known as "era of compulsory acquisition" whose basic foundation was "public interest" which was given supremacy on "private interest". It is well known facet of law that when so ever conflict arises between "public interest and private interest", the private interest has to make way for public interest and that is how, the 1894 Act contributed to the development of this country. The 1894 Act was in itself a complete code and had prescribed the procedure so as to raise grievance against the action of the State Government to acquire someone's land and when so ever Courts found any deviation of State/its authorities from settled procedure, the interference has been made so as to come to the rescue of such land owners. Applying the said settled principles to the factual matrix of the present case, where, the land was acquired for setting up of the Industrial Model Township wherein the land in question was not released by the State Govt. on the recommendation of developing agency i.e. HSIIDC as it was seriously affecting the planning of IMT vis-avis the case put forth by the petitioner of granting it the NOC to set up the college and land in question (vacant 63K 17M), the question arises is as to whether, the action of the State Govt to acquire the land in question, can be termed to be unreasonable, as being sought to be contended by the petitioner? We find ourselves to agree the same as if we are to hold that once permission is granted/NOC is granted for setting up of college and thereafter, State cannot acquire it for all time to come, this may lead to an anomalous situation which may not be in the larger public interest and would amount to "public interest" making way for "private interest" which is not permissible at any costs/under any circumstances.

(3.) The petitioners have questioned the acquisition of their land in question measuring 63k 17M, interalia, on the grounds:- (i) having granted the permission to set up the school and the NOC being issued to set up the B.Ed. college and afterwards State cannot turn around and acquire the land for development of Industrial Model township to be developed as an Integrated complex for industrial, residential, recreational and other public utilities; (ii) the land in question though vacant but being reserved for future expansion will prejudice the future prospects of the educational institution especially when the claim of planning/developing agency is that the land in question interferes merely in the proposed vehicle testing track which as per the petitioner does not constitute any public purpose and thus, same can be conveniently adjusted in the plan; (iii) recommendations having been made by the land Acquisition Collector u/s 5A of the 1894 Act to release the land, the State cannot proceed to acquire the said land; (iv) Violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India by referring to certain releases made by the State and setting up the plea of hostile discrimination on the part of the State.