BABU RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 8332 and 15027 of 2006 because in both the petitions challenge is to the notification dated 23.11.2005 (P-2), issued under Section 4 read with Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, 'the Act') and declaration made under Section 6 of the Act, dated 2.1.2006 (P-3), for acquiring the land of the petitioners for construction of Sewage Treatment Plants, Jind-Patiala Road across Railway Crossing Narwana Town, behind New Grain Market, Narwana Town. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents not to dispossess them from the land in question.

(2.) FACTS are being referred from C.W.P. No. 8332 of 2006. The petitioners are owner of land measuring 34 Kanal 2 Marlas at Narwana, District Jind, which is situated at Jind-Patiala road across, railway crossing Narwana Town, adjoining New Grain Market, Narwana. In the year 1995- 96, land measuring 42 acres 2 Kanals 8.75 Marlas, belonging to the petitioners was acquired, in pursuance to the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. The petitioners challenged the said acquisition by filing C.W.P. No. 1222 of 1997 (Babu Ram v. State of Haryana) in this Court. The writ petition stands admitted vide order dated 28.1.1997 and orders of status quo is in operation. On 23.11.2005, another notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued for acquiring different track of land measuring 27 acre 3 Kanals and 16 Marlas land, for the aforementioned public purpose. While issuing notification dated 23.11.2005, urgency provisions as per clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act have been invoked. The provisions of Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with. In other words the provision concerning filing of objections against the proposed acquisition was not to apply in regard to the acquisition (P-2). Thereafter, the respondent State issued declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 2.1.2006, acquiring 27 acres 3 Kanals and 16 marlas of land including the land belonging to the petitioners of both the petitions. A civil suit was filed by Mitaso Educational Society Narwana, in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narwana, for restraining the respondents from constructing the Sewage Treatment Plant in front of the school, which is being run by the said Society. On 15.2.2006 an interim order was passed by the learned Civil Judge restraining the respondents from constructing the Sewage Treatment Plant, inasmuch as, the same was a health hazard for inhabitants of the locality. Similarly, another civil suit, titled as Jagroop v. State of Haryana, was filed, wherein also similar ad interim order was passed on 12.4.2006. On 5.5.2006, notices under Section 9 of the Act were issued to the petitioners directing them to appear before the Land Acquisition Collector, Jind-respondent No. 2. As per the stipulation made in notice, award was to be pronounced on 23.5.2006. On 24.5.2006, C.W.P. No. 8332 of 2006 was filed in this Court, whereas C.W.P. No. 15027 of 2006 was filed on 18.9.2006. The principal ground canvassed by the petitioners in the writ petition is that the present acquisition for the purpose of construction of Sewage Treatment Plant is not at all in public interest. It has been contended that the Sewage Treatment Plant has been proposed to be constructed adjoining the Grain Market, Narwana, which is neither practical nor possible keeping in view the surrounding localities and the township. Rather the Sewage Treatment Plant should be set up at the outskirt of the township. In para 11 of the writ petition, it has been asserted that the land belonging to the petitioners has been sought to be acquired because of mala fide, extraneous considerations and political pressure, inasmuch as, the petitioners belong to the Indian National Lok Dal and having close allegiance with the former Chief Minister. Earlier also, in the year 1995, the land of the petitioners, which is situated opposite side of the present land, was sought to be acquired during the Congress regime, when notifications under Section 4 and 6 of the Act were issued for acquiring 42 acres 2 kanals of land belonging to the petitioners. The aforementioned notifications are subject matter of challenge in C.W.P. No. 1222 of 1997. It has further been asserted that by invoking the urgency provisions as per clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act, the respondents have taken away the valuable right of the petitioners for filing objections under Section 5-A of the Act, which action on the part of the respondents is totally illegal and unsustainable keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case.

(3.) INITIALLY a written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was filed on 8.11.2006, raising a preliminary objection that the petitioners have already filed Civil Suit No. 5 of 2006, titled as Mitaso Education Society v. State of Haryana in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narwana, inasmuch as, Shri Babu Ram-petitioner No. 1 and Krishan Kumar- petitioner No. 2 are members of the aforementioned Society and actually they are owners of the property of Mitaso Education Society. However, subsequently an amended written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was filed on 5.3.2007, pointing out that the aforementioned civil suit was withdrawn by the petitioners on 12.2.2007. It has been asserted that since the Civil Court was already taking cognizance of the matter, the petitioners are estopped from filing the present writ petition. The factual position with regard to issuance of notifications etc. has been admitted. It has also been pointed out that three sewage treatment plants were planned at various locations at Narwana and three patches of land have been acquired. The sewage treatment plant, subject matter of instant petition, has been designed to cater the population of 18,000 people, who are facing threat of contamination of under ground water, due to non-availability of the sewage treatment plant and sewerage system. It has been claimed that the site in question has been selected after thorough survey of the area and the acquired piece of land is most suitable for construction of sewage treatment plant. Commissioning of sewage treatment plant is for the benefit of entire population and the petitioners would get adequate compensation for the acquisition of their land. The allegation of mala fide and arbitrariness have been denied.