ANIL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Reply by way of counter affidavit on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 filed today in Court is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, challenge is to the notifications dated 22.12.2010 (Annexure P-6) issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short "the Act") and dated 3.10.2012 (Annexure P-12) issued under Section 6 of the Act.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition as narrated therein are that the petitioners owned land measuring 8 bighas 19 biswas in village Chhat, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar comprised in khasra Nos. 363(5-8), 364(1-1) and 365(2-10). In the year 2007, they decided to set up a marriage palace, namely, Apsara Resort/Apsara Garden and in April, 2007 deposited Rs. 22080/- and Rs. 11592/-, respectively with the Forest Department, Punjab for availing an access to the proposed marriage palace from the Zirakpur Patiala National Highway No. 64 as certain trees were blocking the proposed access. An application was submitted to the Fire Station Officer, Fire Station, Dera Bassi for grant of fire safety certificate who vide letter dated 9.10.2007 (Annexure P-2) after verification issued a Fire Safety Certificate for Apsara Garden which was to be renewed from year to year. The said marriage palace was made of A-Class construction and had modern day facilities etc. The petitioners had spent Rs. 49,62,000/- on the land and Rs. 87,90,000/- on the construction and other infrastructure available at Apsara Resort/Apsara Garden. Since 2007, the petitioners have deposited various amounts towards excise licence fee, service tax and luxury tax etc. On 5.2.2009, the State Government issued a notification under Section 4 of the Act for acquiring a huge chunk of land measuring 929.73 acres in villages Matran, Kishanpura, Narayangarh, Manauli, Chachu Majra, Bakarpur and Chhat, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar for public purpose. The said notification was followed by subsequent notification under Section 6 of the Act for acquiring the land measuring 771.34 acres. Thus, an area of 158.39 acres was released from acquisition. The notifications were challenged by certain landowners in this Court by way of CWP No. 6586 of 2010 as according to them they had their residential structures. As the State Government had decided to release the land of the petitioners, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 21.12.2010 (Annexure P-4) as having rendered infructuous. The State Government issued another notification under Section 4 of the Act on 22.12.2010 for acquiring land measuring 35 kanals 5 marlas for the public purpose of "acquisition of remaining khasra numbers of mix land use area, 300 mtrs on both sides of 200 feet road from Sector 66-66A Junction to NH-64 near Village Chhat in Urban Estate, SAS Nagar. Out of land measuring 8 bighas 19 biswas owned by the petitioners, land measuring 6 bighas 19 biswas in khasra No. 363(5-8), 364(0-1) and 365(1-10) was included in the notification under Section 4 of the Act. The petitioners filed objections dated 19.1.2011 (Annexure P-7) under Section 5A of the Act against the said acquisition. Without taking any action on the objections of the petitioners, notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 18.5.2011 (Annexure P-8). On 4.7.2011, the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, SAS Nagar issued a notice to Apsara Resort/Apsara Garden calling upon the petitioners to get the marriage palace registered and deposit tax. The petitioners challenged the said notifications issued under the Act by filing CWP No. 19449 of 2011. The aforesaid writ petition came up for hearing on 18.10.2011 and this Court while issuing notice of motion had stayed dispossession. The writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 15.3.2012 (Annexure P-9) and the notification issued under Section 6 of the Act was set aside and the respondents were directed to consider the objections of the petitioners and proceed ahead from the stage of illegality in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners filed another set of objections under Section 5A of the Act. Respondent No. 2 vide report dated 11.6.2012 (Annexure P-11) recommended rejection of the objections of the petitioners and thereafter, respondent No. 1 issued notification dated 3.10.2012 (Annexure P-12) under Section 6 of the Act including the land of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, since the notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued after a lapse of more than one year from the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, the entire acquisition proceedings were liable to be quashed. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that notification under Section 4 of the Act was published in the Gazette on 22.12.2010 followed by publication in roznamcha on 26.12.2010. It was published in the newspaper on 6.1.2011. Thereafter, the petitioners approached this. Court challenging acquisition by filing CWP No. 19449 of 2011 in which interim stay was granted on 18.10.2011 which remained in operation till 15.3.2012 when the writ petition was allowed. According to the learned counsel after excluding the aforesaid period from 18.10.2011 to 15.3.2012 in terms of Explanation 1 to Section 6, the notification issued under Section 6 of the Act on 3.10.2012 was beyond limitation. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Padma Sundara Rao (Dead) and others v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2002 3 SCC 533in support of the submissions.