STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice Alok Aradhe of J&K High Court Jammu Wing on Wednesday disposed of bunch of petitions regarding land acquisition for the construction of New Bus Stand Katra with a direction that the competent authority shall issue notice under Sections 9 and 9-A of the Act and shall adhere to the prayer of the petitioners for demarcation of the land in question and thereafter shall proceed to acquire the land in question, in accordance with law.
It was directed that possession of the land shall be taken from the petitioners only after payment of 80 per cent of amount of compensation which shall be determined as per the market value of the land by the Collector, Land Acquisition. It is also directed that in case Government feels at any stage of proceeding that excess land has been acquired, it shall be at liberty to de-notify the same.
In this bunch of writ petitions, since common questions of law and facts arise for consideration with regard to validity of the proceeding initiated for acquisition of the lands of the petitioners, they were heard together and are being decided by this common order. The writ petitions include OWP No.797/2012, OWP No.1351/2012, OWP No.678/2012 and OWP No.589/2017 comprising owners of land in question.
Justice Alok Aradhe after hearing both the sides observed that the contention of the petitioners that they were not given an opportunity of hearing cannot be accepted as the order sheet indicates that their objections were considered by the Collector Land Acquisition by assigning reasons and they were given opportunity of being heard. “The land in question is being acquired for the purpose of construction of New Bus Stand which is a public purpose and Supreme Court has held that it is not for the Court to decide to which particular land and to what extent it was suitable for acquisition but it is for the Government to decide, therefore, the contention of the petitioners that excess land is being acquired cannot be examined by this Court”, Justice Aradhe observed adding that a bench of this Court had granted ad interim order of status quo, therefore, the respondents did not proceed with the land acquisition process and hence submission that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of Section 11(B) of the Act also does not deserve acceptance. “The petitioners have already filed objections in pursuance of notice under Section 5-A of the Act and have been heard, therefore, the challenge to the validity of the notification under Section 4 of the Act cannot be entertained at this stage of the proceeding as no prejudice has been caused to the petitioners”, the court observed.