LAWS(P&H)-1998-2-100

MELA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On February 20, 1998
MELA SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by S. Parsoon, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, for quashing the notification issued under the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act" ).

(2.) PETITIONER are the residents of village Lodhipur, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Rup Nagar and owned agricultural land measuring 47 Kanals 14 Marlas situated in that village. Some petitioners are said to have constructed their houses on the land. A notification Under Section 4 of the Act was issued by the State of Punjab on July 17, 1997 acquiring land measuring 580 Kanals 9 Marlas in village Lodhipur, Mataur, Anandpur Sahib and Jhinjiri, District Rup Nagar. The land was sought to be acquired for setting up an urban estate. The petitioners' land was also covered under that notification. Two notifications were subsequently issued Under Section 6 of the Act, one on October 13, 1997 and the other on November 12, 1997. Another notification dated December 3, 1997 was issued Under Section 17 (2) of the Act.

(3.) THE petitioners have alleged that there was no proper and sufficient publication of notification dated July 17, 1997 at the convenient places in the locality where the petitioners reside. An entry dated August 6, 1997 was made by the officials in the 'rapat Roznamcha' (Annexure P-3) but that would show as to where 'munadi' was made and where copy of the notification was affixed in the locality. It is, therefore, argued that the publication was neither sufficient nor proper and was, therefore, not in accordance with law. It was necessary to publish the substance of the notification issued under the Section 4 of the Act at the convenient places of the locality. The entry made in the 'rapat Roznamcha' is said to be a formal entry without any real publication of the notification. Since it was not clear as to where the 'munadi' was made and where the copy of the notification was affixed, the publication is said to be bad in law.