Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from acquisition of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for development of sectors. The original appellant, Dharam Pal Goel, had purchased 1 bigha 12 biswas of land in Khasra Nos. 718/2/2 Min and 714/1/1 Min in village Khandsa, Gurgaon, and constructed a school building in October 1985. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on January 30, 1989 for public purpose, namely development of sectors, followed by a declaration under Section 6 on January 25, 1990. The appellant filed a writ petition in the Punjab & Haryana High Court contending that the land served a public purpose as a school for local children and should not be acquired. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on September 25, 1993. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court by special leave. On May 10, 1996, the Supreme Court directed an officer named by the respondents to inspect and report on the actual land needed for the school building and playground, and the extent of land that could be released without disturbing the scheme. The Director of Urban Estates, Haryana submitted a report stating that the school was immediately by the side of the Jaipur-Delhi national highway, which had fast moving traffic; a restricted zone was required to provide a service lane and tree plantation buffer against pollution. The report noted that 2066 square yards had already been released, resulting in a green belt/non-buildable zone of 135 feet wide along the national highway instead of the planned 165 feet, and no more land should be released. The Court considered the only question whether the land served any public purpose and required denotification. It found that the school was situated between the national highway and the proposed buffer road, which was needed for plantation and pollution control. Since the alignment required 165 feet of land, that part could not be released. The Court accepted the inspection report and found no reason to direct deletion of any part of the land. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Public Purpose - Denotification - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 4(1) and 6 - The appellant constructed a school on acquired land and sought release contending it served public purpose; Court considered inspection report showing school was adjacent to Jaipur-Delhi national highway, requiring 165' green belt and service road, with 2066 sq yards already released; Held that further release would affect alignment of service road and buffer zone, so no more land could be released, and acquisition for development of sectors was valid; appeal dismissed with no costs (Paras not specified).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the land purchased by the appellant serves any public purpose and is, therefore, required to be denotified from the acquisition?
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; no costs.
Law Points
- Land acquired for public purpose of development of sectors cannot be released merely because landowner used it for another public purpose
- where acquired land falls within alignment of national highway green belt and service road
- release would disturb scheme
- report of inspection is material to determine extent of release
- court may not interfere unless acquisition arbitrary.
