HC cancels land acquisition in Gr Noida

Citing various Supreme Court judgments,the court said that acquisition of land for “planned industrial development” can be considered an acquisition “for a public purpose”. However,it did not mean that the authority concerned had automatic rights to dispense with the right of the landowners to be heard under Section 5 of the act (on whether or not they wanted to part with their land),the court said. It also noted that the authority concerned has produced almost identical justification as in several other cases for invoking Section 17 (1),most of which have not been able to pass legal scrutiny.

The petition was filed by Savitri Mohan,who ran a floriculture unit on her plot (which was part of the 68.129 hectares to be acquired) in Chhaprola village. The court took note of the fact that the unit has been preparing seeds,which were distributed within the country and even exported. The unit had also received a certificate from the President’s secretariat in 1982 for the quality of its seeds. Another agro-based industry was also being run from an adjacent plot,the court noted.

Petitioner’s counsel Ashwani Kumar Sharma had also pointed out that she had made a representation before the authority and the state government against the proposed land acquisition but was not given a chance to be heard on the ground that the land was acquired under the urgency clause. He also argued that despite the acquisition process being initiated in 2009,no work was taken up in the interim years.