KANWAR MADAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in this writ petition have assailed the acquisition of their lands and have prayed for quashing of the Notification issued under Sections 4, 6 and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) on various ground, inter alia, that Notification under subsection (1) of Sec. 6 of the Act was not published within the period of limitation of one year as provided under the second proviso thereof and also that after the acquisition of the land, the petitioners and to her land owners would be rendered landless and further than 50 Bighas of land belonging to the Government is lying vacant across the National Highway by pass where already a housing colony has been constructed by the H.P. Housing Board where rest of the housing colony can be constructed.

(2.) The admitted facts on record are that the petitioners are permanent residents of village Sangti, Pargana Chabrogti, Tehsil and District Shimla, where they own 55 Bighas 9 Biswas of land (hereinafter called the land in dispute) alongwith other co -owners/co sharers. By Notification dated 30.7.1993 issued under Section 4 of the Act, the land in dispute was notified to be needed for the public purpose of construction of Housing Board Colony by the H.P.Housing Board, which is owned and controlled by the State Government. This Notification (Anncxure P -A) was published in the Indian Express on 11.11.1993. There is no dispute that the publication of this Notification was made in the Official Gazette, two daily Newspapers circulated in the locality, of which one was in a regional language. Public notice of the substance of such Notification, at convenient places in the locality, was also given. The parties have agreed that the last date of such publication and the giving of such public notice may be treated as the Publication in the Indian Express on 11.11.1993, for the purpose of determining whether the Notification under subsection (1) of Section 6 of the Act was published within the period of limitation of one year.

(3.) The petitioners have alleged that the Notification under subsection (1) of Section 6 and Section 7 was issued on 8.11.1994 and was published in the Indian Express on 5.12.1994, beyond the period of limitation of one year from 11.11.1993 when Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published. in the Indian Express. The respondents in their reply dated 25.7.1995, filed on the affidavit of Sh.H.S.Thakur, the then Land Acquisition Collector (S.D.O. (C) (Rural), Shimla, have stated in Para 8 that,.... notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 was issued vide No. Housing -5 (F)6 -l/91 dated 8.11.1994 which was published in the daily news papers i.e. Indian Express arid Vir Pratap on 8.11.1994." In their rejoinder, the petitioners have reiterated that the Notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act was published on 5.12.1994 in the Indian Express and not on 8.11.1994 as stated by the respondents in their reply affidavit. When this matter came up for admission before a Division Bench of this Court on 9.4.1996, on perusal of the record,, and, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it was directed that the report sent by the Sub Divisional Magistrate - cum -Collector dated 24th April, 1994, which is available in file (Case No.) 2/93 and the spot inspection report made by the said officer in the month of March, 1996 shall be filed before this Court with an affidavit. The main file of the State Government in which the report of the Collector under Section 5 -A of the Land Acquisition Act was considered alongwith the note sheets was also ordered to be produced on the next date. In pursuance of this order, Sh. H.S. Thakur, the then Land Acquisition Collector (S.D.M. (Rural), Shimla, filed another affidavit on 20.5.1996 stating that after holding inquiry under Section 5 -A of the Act, the Land Acquisition Collector sent his report to the Government on 25.4.1994 in which he had not recommended the acquisition of the land is dispute in view of the objections of the petitioners and other land holders. It is also stated that the Notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act was issued on 8.11.1994. In another affidavit dated 1.6.1996, he repeated the same averments in respect of issuance of Notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act and nothing has been stated about the publication thereof, -as required under subsection (I) of Section 6 of the Act.. It is also stated that on the directions of the Additional District Magistrate, Shimla, spot inspection was conducted by the Tehsildar (Rural), Shimla, Assistant Engineer, HP PWD (B &. R), Kasumpti Sub -division, and Agriculture Development Officer, Mashobra, on 29.3.1996 who gave their report on 2.4.1996, a copy whereof has been placed on record. It was pointed out in the report that out of 22 share holders of the land in dispute, none will be rendered landless after the proposed acquisition of their lands, though they would have meager land holdings in t he revenue estate Sangti.