Land acquisitionon, appeal of Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority allowed by Supreme Court and reversed High Court of Bombay Judgment.
August 4, 2018
A Bench of Supreme Court Judges, Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit allowed the Civil Appeal challenging the order of Division Bench of High Court of Bombay in Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority V. Vishnudev Cooperative Housing Society & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 7649 of 2018. While allowing the appeal the court said that "we are of the considered view that the High Court failed to examine the issues arising in the case in its correct perspective. We cannot, therefore, concur with the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the High Court which wrongly upheld the order dated 10.06.2004 passed by the concerned Revenue Minister."
The facts of the case are:
Survey No. (Gat. No.210 - measuring around 39 H 26 R and Survey No. 211
measuring around 1 H 23 R-Total land 40 H 49 R) situated at Mauje Wakad,
Tehsil Mulshi, District Pune (Maharashtra) was originally owned by the
members of one "Deo" family.
On 12.03.1970, the State Government acquired this land by issuing a
notification under Section 4 of the Act. It was followed by publication of
declaration under Section 6 of the Act. The acquisition was for a public
purpose, namely, "planned development and utilization of lands in Pimpri
Chinchwad Township Area for industrial, commercial and residential
purposes". The development project for which the land was acquired was to be
executed through Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority.
The Special Land Acquisition Officer then initiated the proceedings under
Section 11 of the Act for determination of the compensation payable to the
landowners and accordingly passed an award dated 23.09.1986. The SLAO then
issued notices to the landowners as required under Section 12 (2) of the
Act. Since the landowners did not accept the compensation, the entire amount
of compensation was deposited by the SLAO in Revenue Deposit Account of
Treasury.
The members of "Deo family" (landowners) felt aggrieved by the award dated
23.09.1986 and filed writ petition being W.P. No. 3719/1987 in the High
Court at Bombay. This writ petition was dismissed by the High Court by order
dated 18.07.1989. The writ petitioners felt aggrieved by the dismissal of
their writ petition filed review petition (R.P. No. 3751/1989) before the
High Court, which was also dismissed as withdrawn on 08.09.1989. Aggrieved
by the dismissal of the writ petition and the review petition, the
landowners filed SLP (c) No.12889/1989 in the Supreme Court. It was also
dismissed as withdrawn on 27.11.1989.
In the meantime, on 19.09.1989, the members of "Deo Family" filed an
application under Section 48(1) of the Act to the Revenue Minister of the
State of Maharashtra and prayed therein for release of their acquired land.
During pendency of this application, the landowners filed writ petition
(No.36/1990) in the High Court and prayed therein for a direction to the
State for deciding their application. By order dated 12.01.1990, the High
Court disposed of the writ petition and directed the State to decide the
landowners' application in accordance with law.
By order dated 07.07.1992, the State Government partly allowed the
landowners' application and while releasing the land measuring 29 H 98 R
retained the remaining land measuring10 H 51 R for execution of the
development project for which the entire land had been acquired.
It appears from the record of the proceedings that after the dismissal of
the review petition, the landowners (members of "Deo family") transferred
the acquired land in question to the members of one Co-operative Housing
Society called, "Vishnudev Cooperative Housing Society" - respondent No.1
herein on or about 25.10.1993.
Respondent No.1 (VCHS) claiming to be the owner of the land in question felt
aggrieved and filed writ petition (1116/1993) questioning therein the
legality of the order of the State dated 07.07.1992 to the extent it
declined to release the remaining land measuring 10 H 51 R. The High Court,
by order dated 23.03.1993, dismissed the writ petition and upheld the order
of the State. Respondent No.1 (VCHS) carried the matter in this Court by
filing SLP (C) No.10056/1993. By order dated 26.11.1993, this Court
dismissed the SLP. The Divisional Commissioner then passed a final order
dated 20.08.1994 under Section 48 (1) of the Act directing therein for
deletion of 29 H 98 R from Survey No. 210 and retaining of 10 H 33 R as
acquired land for completion of development project. This is how, out of
total acquired land, the land measuring 29 H 98 R was released in favour of
landowners from the acquisition proceedings and the land measuring 10 H 33 R
was retained to enable the State to execute the development project on the
said land through the agency of the appellant.
Notwithstanding the termination of two rounds of litigation up to this
Court, the landowners - VCHS again started third round and filed fresh writ
petition (3200/1994) in the High Court and this time prayed therein for
deletion of 10 H 55 R from Survey No. 210/1. By order dated 07.09.1994, the
High Court dismissed the writ petition. Again the said order, the VCHS filed
SLP (C) No.22907/1994 in this Court and the same was dismissed by order
dated 10.02.1995.
Read the Judgment of Supreme Court of India in Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority V. Vishnudev Cooperative Housing Society & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 7649 of 2018 dated 3.8.2018