Utpadan Mandi Samiti Vs. Moti Lal & Ors  INSC 841 (21 November 1997)
NANAVATI, S.P. KURKUKAR
21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1997 Present:
Mr. Justice G.T. Nanavati Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.P. Kurdukar O.P. Rana, Sr. Adv.
Pradeep Misra, T. Mahipal, Advs. with him for the appellant Janak Singh Tomer,
Adv. for K.K. Gupta, Adv. for the Respondents.
J U D
G E M E N T The following judgment of the Court was delivered.
leaned counsel for the parties.
only ground on which the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the
respondents challenging the attempt to acquire their lands in plot No. 2611 of
village Kashai was that the said plot was not notified for acquisition and,
therefore, it was not open to the State Government to deprive the appellants of
the said lands or to interfere with their possession. It is true that while
issuing notification under Section 4 on 2.6.1978 the State Government committed
a mistake in stating the name of the village in which the said plot is
situated. In the said notification it was described as a plot of village Bankat
whereas really the said plot is situated in village Kashai.
this mistake the State Government had issued a corrigendum dated 27.11.1978
which was published in U.P. gazette on 16.12.1978 and thereby the said mistake
was corrected by stating that what was sought to be acquired under Section 4
notification was 0.91 acres of land of plot No. 2611 of village kashai. It was
because of the negligence of the State Government that the said fact was not
brought to the notice of the High Court. However, in view of this corrigendum
it cannot be disputed that 0.91 acres of land out of the said plot was notified
for acquisition by the State Government. The declaration made under Section 6
was also required to be read accordingly. It was, therefore, not proper for the
High Court to declare that no part of plot No. 2611 of village Kashai was
notified for acquisition and to grant an injunction restraining the State from
taking over possession of the respondents' lands. On this limited ground we
allow this appeal, set aside the order passed by the High Court and hold that
the State Government had notified 0.91 acres of land of plot No. 2611 of
village kashai for acquisition offer the benefit of the appellant- samiti. We,
however, make it clear that as the only point which was considered by the High
court , was whether the lands of he respondent were notified for acquisition or
not, it will be open to the respondent s to take any appropriate action on any
other ground, if it is available to them as respondents have been dragged to
this Court because of the negligence of the State Government and the appellant-samiti,
the appellant is directed to pay to the contesting respondents Rs. 5,000/- by
way of cost of this appeal even though they have succeeded in this appeal.