JAI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of all the above numbered writ petitions as they relate to the same notifications u/s 4 (1) of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 (for short the Act) and the award made under Sec. 11 of the Act.

(2.) THE petitioners are recorded as Khatedar tenant of the agricultural land in village Laxamangarh bearing different khata numbers. A notification u/s 4 (1) of the said Act was published in Rajasthan Gazette dated 22nd August 1984. THE land was sought to be acquired for a public purpose namely 132 K. V. Grid Sub-station. After the publication of the notification as aforesaid without a declaration u/s 6 of the Act an award Annex. 7 dated 7th April 1986 was made.

(3.) IT is really surprising that though earlier award has been made as aforesaid and though the award is held to be illegal and is illegal and this is not disputed by Mr. Rastogi, but still the notification u/s 10 (4) read with s. 6 of the Central Act has been issued and has been published in Rajasthan Gazette Extraordinary dated 17th January 1989. IT has already been stated earlier that a notification u/s 4 (1) of the Act was not in accordance with law and there was non-compliance of Sec. 4 (5) of the Act. The Central Act was amended by the Rajasthan Land Acquisition (Rajasthan Amendment) Ordinance 1987 which was replaced by the Rajasthan Land Acquisition (Rajasthan Amendment) Act, 1987 (for short the Rajasthan Amendment), and after sec. 55 in the Central Act Sec. 56 was inserted. Under Sec. 56 (2) of the Central Act, as it stands after the Rajasthan Amendment as aforesaid, where in any proceedings under the state Act pending under the State Act on 24. 9. 1984 and Collector or the court as the case may be on or after the said date taken any action or made any order then such action or order shall be deemed to have been done or taken in accordance with the provisions of suce Act and shall not be liable to be challenged. All the has been said by Sec. 56 (2) of the Central Act as it stands after the Rajasthan Amendment is that if the notification u/s 4 would have been in accordance with the provisions of the State Act it would have been saved. IT has been stated earlier in the instant case that the notification u/s 4 (1) of the Act was not in accordance with the State Act and, therefore, it cannot be said to have been saved by Sec. 56 (4) of the Central Act.