Court found an ‘unholy nexus of Authorities and Builder to enable builder to profiteer’ in the Acquisition process; Land transferred in the possession of HUDA to serve public purpose
Civil Appeal No. 5072 of 2016
Bench: Justice Anil R. Dave; Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel
Case Brief: Present appeals were against the decision of the High Court which has dismissed the plea of builder against the rights of land owners. The undisputed facts in this case was that the 850.88 acres of the land was proposed to be acquired for the residential/ commercial sector 27-28, Rohtak, Haryana by the Haryana Urban Development Authority under the provisions of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. However, as per the final notification, under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the less area of land. Appellant here being builder- cum- developer entered into collaboration agreements with some of the farmers- owners of the land which was under acquisition in earlier order for development of a colony as per Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. And while so, he earlier filed applications for the grant of licenses, which was allowed and corresponding land was released from acquisition.
Moreover, when High Court was placed with the matter, he clearly decided that the transfer of title of land, covered by the notification for acquisition, in favour of a builder, who sought release of land for setting up of a colony was clearly to defeat the law and the notified purpose of the acquisition. That court by allowing the writ petitions, decided to declare the sale deeds executed in favour of builder as null and void and non- existent in the eyes of law. Several other directions were also given. Now, when this bench considered the various rival contentions, and facts of the case as also observed by the High court, it held that there is no reason whatsoever to disagree with the findings of the High Court, that the present case is a gross abuse of law on account of unholy nexus of the concerned authorities and the builder for enabling the builder to profiteer. Thus, bench decided that the said land in dispute can either be taken by the State for the compelling public purpose or it can be returned back to its original owners, however, should not be to the builder. Thereafter, the bench decided the issue that in whose favour the said land is to be allocated, and then it observed that the notifications which were issued earlier in this connection for the acquisition of the land were not bad in law, and as such the said land which was covered under such notifications should be vested with Haryana Urban Development Authority free from all encumbrances. And this bench asked the said authority to take the possession of such land forthwith.
Read the Judgement: Uddar Gagan Properties Ltd Vs. Sant Singh & Ors