GHULAM MOHD MATTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS had three storied house at Kishtwar, which came to be acquired for construction of link road from Bus Stand to Sadar Bazar Kishtwar. Compensation has been assessed by the Collector, Land Acquisition, at the rate of Rs 1.32 lac being costs of the land and structure constructed thereon. It is alleged that petitioners were not aware of the acquisition proceedings that commenced with the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 7.9.1989. It is further stated that no notice under Sections 4, 5A and 9 of the Land Acquisition Act was ever served upon the petitioners, who were the owners of the acquired property and are interested persons. According to petitioners, they acquired knowledge of acquisition proceedings only in the month of March, 1999, when they were informed by respondent -2. This was followed by notice dated 23.8.1999, for receiving compensation awarded by the respondents in respect of their property. Further allegation of the petitioners is that they were under threat of eviction and demolition of the house and forced to accept the amount of compensation. They accepted the same under protest on 27.8.1999. Petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of acquisition proceedings and award dated 29.3.1997, passed by respondent -2. Besides this, they have also challenged provisions of Sections 12, 15 and 23 of the Land Acquisition Act as ultra -vires of the Constitution of India particularly Articles 14 and 31A. In alternate, petitioners seek direction for reassessment and revaluation of the acquired property in accordance with market value as prevalent in the year 1997 i.e when award was made.

(2.) MAIN ground urged on behalf of the petitioners is that even though acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1989 and petitioners being interested persons were never put to any notice or associated with acquisition proceedings. It is stated that the proceedings took long time and finally culminated into passing of the award dated 29.3.1997. Even after the passing of the award in the year 1997, they came to know about acquisition proceedings in the year 1999 and thus assessment of compensation of the property should have been as on the date of passing of the award because possession was sought to be taken after passing of the award. With regard to challenge under Sections 12, 15 and 23 of the Land Acquisition Act is concerned, it is stated that provision contained in these Sections for assessment of value as on the date of issuance of declaration under Section 6, is unconstitutional as it deprives petitioners of their legitimate right to claim compensation as per market value. Petitioners claim that they have a right under Articles 14 and 31A of the Constitution of India to claim market value of the acquired property. Respondents have filed their counter through SDM Kishtwar. Claim of the petitioners is resisted on the ground that land was acquired for public purpose vis -' -vis construction of Link Road and acquisition proceedings were initiated in accordance with provisions of Land Acquisition Act by issuing notification under Sections 4(1), 6, 7, 9 and 9A and even final award stands passed after affording full opportunity to all the claimants. It is further stated that value of the structure involved was assessed by Executive Engineer, PWD Kishtwar and accordingly, amount of compensation was paid to the petitioners, who received the same from the competent authority.

(3.) IT is settled law that a person can be deprived of his property required for public purpose in accordance with procedure established under law. Land Acquisition Act contain procedure for acquisition of the property required for public purpose. It also defines public purpose for which property can be acquired. There is no dispute regarding the fact that property has been acquired for the public purpose i.e for construction of Link road. From the pleadings of the parties it appears that intimation of the acquisition proceedings, service of mandatory notices upon the petitioners has not been established. Strictly speaking provisions of the Land Acquisition Act does not seem to have been observed. After publishing notice under Section 4(1), interested persons have a right to file objections and objections are to be disposed of after affording full opportunity to such interest persons in terms of Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act.