AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Avadh Behari, J.
(1) Appellant Society owned certain lands. Govt. also allotted to it some lands. Govt. then by notification u/s. 4 of L.A. Act acquired all their lands. Then in March, 58, Govt. denotified their 28.15 acres which included 12 bids was (8+4) in dispute. On 6-11-58, Govt. issued notification u/s. 4 about 31.72 acres and this included said 8+4 biswas. Then notification u/s. 6, 7 was issued in respect of portion of land on 18-10-63 and another declaration u/s. 6, 7 was made on 3-9-64 about some more land which included said 8+4 biswas. Appellant filed writ on 3-3-65 against notifications of 6-1 1-58 and 3-9-64. Single Judge dismissed the writ and Society filed L.P.A.
(2) It was held that the Govt. had a right to issue notification on 5-11-58 after notification of 8-3-57 .had been declared invalid. Invalidity arose as notification claimed urgency. No infirmity attached to notification of 6-11-58. Notifications u/s. 6, 7 were perfectly valid as these were issued after having and considering the objections of the interested persons. Notification u/s. 4 is reservoir from which portions may be drawn and notified u/s. 6 at different times but within a fixed period. Notification u/s 6 does not exhaust the omnibus S. 4 reservoir. Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1976, authorises Govt. to make any number of declarations u/s. 6 of different portions of land within a fixed period. Act also validated earlier acquisitions. But if a certain land is notified u/s. 6, a 2nd notification about same land cannot be issued u/s. 6 per B.K. Prakash Mani v. Uoi 1975. Rajdhani L.R.431. 8+4 bids was were not mentioned in notification of 18-12-63. These could thus be notified on 3-9-64. Notification pertaining to this is thus not invalid.