RANDHIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Punjab acquired the land of the petitioners in village Gill for alloting the same to landless workers for house sites. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the Act) to that effect was published in the Punjab Government Gazette (Extraordinary) on January 31, 1974. The petitioners challenged the acquisition of their land on various grounds. One of the grounds, which is now being pressed, is that public notice of the substance of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act was never published in village Gill. An averment to that effect was made in para 5 of the writ petition. In reply to the said averment, though it stated in para 5 of the return that the substance of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act was duly published in the locality yet the date of the alleged publication of the substance of notification in the locality is no where mentioned therein. It gives an impression that the respondents tried to keep the date of giving public notice of the substance of the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in village Gill, a secret. This gives rise to a presumption against them. Mr. Wasu has been unable to disclose from the record available with him the date when the public notice of the substance of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act was given in village Gill. On this state of affairs, I find that either public notice of the substance of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act was not given in village Gill or even if it was given, it was given beyond thirty days after publication of the said notification in the Government Gazette. In these premises and in view of the well-settled law that it is imperative to give public notice of the substance of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act at convenient places in the locality where the acquired land is situated immediately, or at the most within thirty days from the date of publication of the said notification in the Government Gazette, and non-giving of such a public notice renders the acquisition proceedings invalid, the conclusion is inevitable that the acquisition of land of the petitioners has been invalid on account of non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 4 of the Act. It is on that ground that this petition succeeds.

(2.) Consequently I allow this writ petition and quash the acquisition of land of the petitioners, with no order as to costs. Petition allowed.