V K MADAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who appears to be a colonizer, purchased 10 acres of land, in one block, in district Gurgaon in revenue estates of villages Gurgaon and Hidayatpur Chawni. Somewhere in 1966, the Gurgaon Improvement Trust took stock of that land and made effort to bring it within a scheme. The scheme was later dropped. The petitioner taking aid of the town planning scheme of the area started developing his land into a colony and allegedly took some steps towards preparing a layout and demarking residential and commercial plots. Then again in 1969 the Improvement Trust, framed a development scheme but gave it up. He then made an application to the Director, Town and Country Planning, Harayana, seeking exemption under section 23 read with section 9 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, so that he could go ahead with the colonizing prospects and the said officer granted him exemption but subject to certain conditions, one of which was to pay Rs. 3 lakh to the Municipal Committee, Gurgaon. Later that order was modified that he could settle the issue with the Municipal Committee. The petitioner then revised the layout plan which was approved by the Director as communicated to him on January 25, 1982.

(2.) In the meantime, the Haryana Government took steps to acquire the land and issued notifications on April 14, 1981, for the purpose, referring therein the use of provisions of section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act. The avowed public purpose was the construction of Police Station City Gurgaon. However, on the representation of the petitioner to the Chief Minister, Haryana, the matter was considered by a high level meeting. The suggestion that the Police Station could be constructed in another sector was received favourably and thus the notifications for acquisition were withdrawn on January 12, 1982. During this while, allegedly the petitioner sold a number of plots and even agreed to sell other plots to prospective buyers. But again the State Government issued notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (Annexure P.10) on March 4,1983, invoking as well the urgency provisions of section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, giving a go-by to the applicability of section 5-A of the said Act. The said notification is subject matter of challenge in this petition primarily on the ground that it is mala fide, the State having abandoned the acquisition of the land; the land was neither waste nor unarable; the Government could not change its position, the action was arbitrary and finally that the provisions of section 17 of the Act could not be invoked in view of the nature of the purpose for which the land was being acquired.

(3.) The Superintendent of Police, Gurgaon, on behalf of the State of Haryana, has countered the allegations of the petitioner and has denied the action being mala fide or the state changing its views for anything but administrative reasons or that the action was arbitrary. With regard to the applicability of section 17, it was countered that keeping in view the urgency for the construction of a building of Police Station City Gurgaon, the provisions of section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act had been justifiably invoked and that there was a dire need for the purpose.