Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
FACTS OF THE CASE - The issue of the case revolves around the large scale acquisition of agricultural and Abadi land of farmers of different villages of Greater Noida and Noida of District Gautam Buddha Nagar in the name of planned industrial development is the subject matter of challenges the 471 petitions mentioned in the judgment One of the submissions made before the Division Bench was that the State had wrongly invoked the provisions of Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act and the right of objection under section 5A was wrongly dispensed with hence, the entire acquisition proceedings deserved to be set aside. Various applications were filed for intervention along with affidavits which were taken on record and we heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the Authority and learned counsel for the interveners. The hearing was completed on 30.9.2011. Along with the main writ petition, there are writ petitions challenging various similar notifications issued under section 4 read with Sections 17(1) and 17(4) and Section 6 regarding 41 villages of greater Noida and 24 villages of Noida. In main writ petition, counter affidavits, supplementary counter affidavits have been filed both by the State as well as by the Authority. The writ petitions relating to different villages are separately grouped and it shall be suffice to refer to the pleadings of the main writ petition as well as leading writ petitions of each village along with pleadings of some other writ petitions which were referred to by different learned counsel during the course of hearing for deciding this bunch of writ petitions. The facts as brought on record in the main writ petition and the reference to the pleadings in the said writ petition are sufficient to comprehend and decide the various issues which have arisen between the parties in these writ petitions.
CONCLUSION- Compensation as determined under the Land Acquisition Act can also be treated to be quite appropriate. As observed in the aforesaid Supreme Court authority, normally there is no resentment against such type of acquisitions. However as far as acquisitions for secondary purposes i.e. for establishing industries and constructing residential units are concerned, they stand on slightly different footing. There cannot be any doubt that such acquisitions also serve public purpose, however the factor of profit making is quite apparent therein. The purpose of No private person or nongovernmental company does business for the purpose of providing employment or for any other purpose except earning profit. If on the acquired land profit earning activity is carried out then the person whose land has been acquired has got full right to have something like a share in the profit. It is for this reason that during recent past in different parts of the country there has been public opposition of various degrees to the land acquisition for the purposes of constructing dwelling units or establishing industries by private persons or non-governmental companies.State in providing land for establishment of industries is that people will get employment and goods will be manufactured increasing the wealth of the nation which is squarely a public purpose. However the purpose of the person who establishes industry would be only and only to earn profit. There is absolutely nothing wrong in it. Business is always done for profit. (As government is rolling back its direct role in industrialization by running industries, hence acquisition for establishing government industries is now a thing of past).
86540
103860
630
114
59824