RAM PRATAP Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ application challenging the acquisition of the petitioner's land Khasra Nos. 345, 346, 347, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355 and 356 measuring 5 Bighas and 19 Biswas and Khasra No. 389 measuring 3 Bighas and 7 Biswas situated in village Chak Sudarshanpura and Bhojpura respectively which was initially in the Khatedari of Dhanna son of Gangaram by caste Kumhar. Petitioner's case is that nursery has been established by the petitioner in the aforesaid land and it is one of the best nurseries in the whole of Rajasthan and plants from this nursery are sent not only in parts of Rajasthan but also in other cities of India. Under the Lalkothi Scheme at the instance of Urban Improvement Trust, Jaipur, land acquisition proceedings were taken and notifications were issued under secs. 4 and 6 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as the 'act of 1953', in the Gazette on 11-5-61. Although several objections have been raised against the aforesaid acquisition but the principal point urged by Mr. Singh for the petitioner is based on discrimination under Art. 14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) IT is alleged that an adjoining nursery to the petitioner's nursery, which is known as Anand Nursery, was acquired in addition to the petitioner's nursery by the said notification and for the same purposes of Lalkothi Scheme by the notification of U. I. T. Jaipur. Both the petitioners as well as Proprietor of Anand Nursery made representation against the acquisition on the ground that even in the master plan itself these lands have been earmarked for nurseries and orchards, dairies and after spending a huge amount and putting up trem-endus labour these nurseries have been built up. Both these representations were under consideration of the State Government. However the representation of Anand Nursery was accepted and an order for de-acquisition was passed in the following term : *** -------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------- ----------------- ---------------- ---------------------- --------------------- ----------------- --------------------- ------------------ ---------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- ----------------------- In this notification reproduced above, it is mentioned that in this nursery, fruits, vegetables and flowers and grapes are cultivated and it has been established at huge amount. Therefore, this nursery should be kept intact and be de-acquisitioned under sec. 48 (1) of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) DR. Tewari on the other hand contested this factual position also. Be that as it may, so far as the respondents are concerned, they cannot be allowed to travel beyond the report of the Land Acquisition Officer which corroborates Mr. Singh's contention so far as his positive case of Pratap Nursery is concerned. It has not been shown to me that the Land Acquisition Officer who gave this report was biased in favour of Pratap Nursery or in any manner he inspite of being a Government Officer deliberately gave a false report to oblige the petitioner. That being so the court can safely rely upon the version given by the Government Officer (Land Acquisition Officer) and assume that Pratap Nursery is a well developed Nursery where vegetables and fruits and other plants useful for human being, are being produced, and maintained in abundance.