Govt picked and chose lands

“We also find merit in the appellants’ plea that the acquisition of their land is vitiated due to violation of the doctrine of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. A reading of the survey report shows that the committee constituted by the State Government had recommended release of land measuring 18.9725 hectares. A large chunk of land measuring 4.3840 hectares was not acquired apparently because the same belong to an ex-member of the legislative assembly,” the bench said in its July 19 judgment,a copy of which was made available on Friday.

Dismissing the argument that some land was released because owners had already constructed houses,the court noted a bias: “Many parcels of land were released from acquisition because the land owners had already raised constructions and were using the same as dwelling units… The appellants had also raised constructions on their land and were using the same for residential and agricultural purposes. Why their land was not left out from acquisition has not been explained in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.”

The court said that the other benches of the Allahabad High Court,where farmers had already gone with their petitions,“should have treated this as sufficient for recording a finding that the respondents had adopted the policy of pick and choose in acquiring some parcels of land and this amounted to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.” Slamming the authorities for “mechanically” applying the urgency clause to acquire land in the name of “planned industrial development,” the court imposed a penalty of Rs 5 lakh on the UP government “for forcing unwarranted litigation” on the farmers.

“If the property belongs to economically disadvantaged segment of the society or people suffering from other handicaps,then the court is not only entitled but is duty bound to scrutinize the action/decision of the State with greater vigilance,care and circumspection keeping in view the fact that the land owner is likely to become landless and deprived of the only source of his livelihood and/or shelter,” it said.

And in a blow to builders,the bench said: “We find that the builders who have been allotted land,and are raising constructions on it,have taken possession on their risk and cost. It is difficult to believe that they were not aware that the acquisition of land in Village Patwari is under challenge in the High Court.”

The verdict,however,provided relief to people who have invested in flats: “We also issue directions,as have been issued by the Supreme Court,in Devendra Kumar’s case that those who have made investment by booking flats etc.,shall be entitled to get back the amount along with interest at an appropriate rate and if the builders refuse to pay the amount,then they shall be free to avail appropriate legal remedy.”