CAG report catches Haryana Finance Minister on wrong foot

Sources said that the government had to scrap the entire acquisition process. Those who had approached the high court after the government released Chatha’s land even after the notification under section 6 of the Act took the plea that the government indulged in selective release of land. Chatha was then the Speaker of the Haryana Vidhan Sabha. He refused to comment on the issue.

Earlier,in February 2002,the government issued a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring 126.30 acres in Ratgal village and 1.17 acres in Dara Kalan village. This land was to be used to develop sector 6 and 11 of Kurukshetra. The government later made a declaration under section 6 of the Act in February 2003 for acquisition of 118.52 acre land. The award was announced in February 2005 for 116.85 acres but at this juncture the government released 1.67 cares of land in Ratgal village.

One of the land owners represented in June for release of land on the ground that there was an orchard measuring 34 kanal 7 marlas and 65 kanals and one marla,which was not considered favourably. He sought the release of land since the area was proposed to be developed as commercial belt. The issue,hence,was reconsidered and an area of 326 kanal and 8 marla (40.80 acres) belonging to 31 persons was released from the acquisition process.

The CAG in its report observed: “While reconsidering the case,the government’s authority under section 48 of the Act was wrongly interpreted. In fact section 48 deals with the withdrawal of the government from the acquisition of any land,the possession of which has bot been taken. But in this case the award had been announced by the Land Acquisition Officer for the entire land and hence the title of the land transferred from the land owners to HUDA.”

Consequent to the above action,another set of 30 land owners approached the high court for quashing the acquisition awards in respect of their respective land on grounds of discrimination. While defending the release of land by the government,state advocate general contended that in order to keep the religious character of Kurukshetra intact,the acquisition of land in the area will be limited to maintenance of essential services. The CAG observed,“Out of Rs 5.07 crore disbursed to land owners after the announcement of the awards,Rs 4.45 crore had been recovered and 0.62 crore were yet to be recovered. The release of land hampered the development of the area besides blocking of funds of HUDA for more than five years.

The state authorities at the time of the exit conference said that the area was not contiguous and was scattered all over the sector making it almost impossible to use the same for development. But CAG gave it’s final ruling saying,“After the vesting of the title of the land and it’s ownership to HUDA,the notification about acquiring the land cannot be withdrawn or cancelled in exercise of powers under section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act. The action of the government to release the said land was,as such,against the provisions of the law.”