Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manmohan Singh And Ors. vs State Of Punjab Through Principal ... on 23 July, 1998
Equivalent citations: (1998)120PLR471, 1998 A I H C 4977, (1998) 120 PUN LR 471, 1998 REVLR 2 256, (1998) 2 LACC 655, (1998) 4 RECCIVR 58, (1998) 2 CURLJ(CCR) 381
Author: B. Rai
Bench: B. Rai
JUDGMENT V.K. Bali, J.
1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two writ petitions bearing No. 11544 and 15860 of 1997, as common questions of law and fact are involved in both these petitions.
2. Facts have however, been extracted from CWP No. 11544 of 1997.
3. Challenge herein is to notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) published in the official gazette on 23.4.1997 as also the declaration under Section 6 once again read with Section 17 of the Act published in the official gazette on 11.6.1997.
4. The case of the petitioner as spelt out from the pleadings and so canvassed by the learned counsel is that the petitioners are the permanent residents of villages Barnhara and Baloke Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The land is ancestral land inherited by the petitioners. Some of the petitioners are small landowners and some have medium land holdings. None of the petitioners is a big landowners. They are earning their livelihood by cultivating the land.
5. State of Punjab issued notifications under Sections 4 and 6 read with Section 17 of the Act for acquiring the land of the petitioners for setting up Sewerage Treatment Plant under the Sutlej Action Plan, Ludhiana. It is the case of the petitioners that initially this plan was charted out in the year 1993 and thereafter till today, it has not been finalised. Originally the land of other villages was proposed to be acquired for the above said purpose and location of the land has been shown in the site plan Annexure P-1. It is further the case of the petitioners that according to the site plan the place for construction of the drainage has been taken from the middle of the land of the villages which in other words is affecting the agricultural land of the villagers and the land acquired for the Treatment Plant is also in the middle of the village. For ecological purpose, the land for this purpose, should have been taken on one side so that the pollution should not be more. When the petitioners came to know about the acquisition of their land for Water Treatment Plant, they immediately made oral representations to the Government as also addressed a letter pleading therein that the land of the petitioners is not fit for the purpose for which the same was acquired. Despite their representations both oral as well as in writing none of the petitioners could possibly raise any objection under Section 5-A of the Act. Therefore, notification under Section 4 followed by declaration under Section 6 read with Section 17 of the Act, were issued on 11.6.1997. Thereafter, petitioners were issued notices under Section 9 of the Act which led the petitioners to file the present writ petition.
6. Mr. Sharma learned counsel representing the petitioners vehemently contends that once the government had taken a period of about one and half months or little more in issuing declaration under Section 6, the same would in itself suggest that there was no urgency at all. He further contends that once a period of one and half months was taken in issuing declaration under Section 6, the petitioners ought to have been given a chance to file objections as envisaged under Section 5-A of the Act; he further contends that no opinion was formed by the government and the present case was a case where urgency provisions as envisaged under Section 17 of the Act ought not to have been invoked.
7. Pursuant to the notice of motion, respondents have filed detailed written statements.
8. Before the points raised by Mr. Sharma are considered, it would be useful to examine the urgency which necessitated avoiding filling of objections under Section 4-A by the landowners. It has inter alia been pleaded in the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No. 4 and 5 as under-
"As per the report of the status of water quality of the Punjab State Published by the Punjab Pollution Control Board the Rivers of Punjab are badly polluted and fall under the category 'C or lower. The water quality of river Satluj is poor due to very high concentration of coliform and high values of Bio-Oxygen Demand (BOD). Moreover, the discharge of waste water/untreated sewage of Ludhiana city into the river Sutlej through Budha Nallah, is creating pollution of the highest magnitude. The non-treatment of sewage waste water leads to spread of water borne diseases such as cholera, typhoid, diarrhea, jaundice, hepatitis etc. many types of pathogenic micro organisms, including bacteria, viruses, protozoa and heminths are present in large numbers in the untreated sewage. The untreated sewage as mentioned above, which in the present circumstances, seeps and gets mixed up with the sub soil water also contains toxic elements like chromium, nickel, zinc, cyanide etc. which causes toxity and leads to many problems.
In view of the above submissions there is great urgency for the construction of Sewage Treatment Plants (S.T.Ps.) at Ludhiana in order to prevent the exposure of the public residing along with Budha Nallah and river Sutlej to such toxic and health hazard. In the light of the above submissions the project to set up Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) has been sponsored by the Ministry of Environment and Forest (River Conservation Directorate), Govt. of India on the pattern of Ganga Action Plan and Yamuna Action Plan. The Government of India has already sanctioned the project and construction of outfall sewer lines have been taken in hand. Besides, Government of India released funds considering the urgency in the acquisition of land for the purpose of setting up of sewage treatment plants. The entire expenditure in the execution of the scheme under 'Satluj Action Plan' is to cost nearly Rs. 2.29 Crores. The cost to the extent of 50% is to be borne by the Government of India and the remaining 50% by the Punjab Government.
In order to implement the scheme, outfall sewer line are being laid from the points where the present sewage water is being thrown into the 'Budha Nallah'. The brick-cum-RCC Sewer of the size 2'-6' diameter is being constructed and thereafter 96" dia will be constructed upto the site of the Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP). The construction is going on in full swing. If at this stage, dispossession of the land is stayed, the execution of the scheme would be delayed causing incalculable harm and injury to the public at large. The dispossession would also delay the execution of the S.T.P. and contribute to the escalation of the Project Cost. The ever evasive funds have been made available with great difficulty and if the cost of the Project rises due to delay in execution, it may not be easy to arrange more funds.
In view of the above submissions it is evident that land for the construction of S.T.P. is required for a public purpose and the provisions of Section 17(2)(c) of Land Acquisition (Punjab Amendment) Act II of 1954 have been invoked in the present case as in the opinion of the State Government the acquisition of the land was/is of urgent importance.
9. When confronted with the urgency involved in the matter as spelt out from the written statement portion whereof has been extracted above, Mr. Sharma could not possibly urge that the purpose for which the land was acquired was not emergent. In fact, this Court has been informed and the same has also been spelt out from the written statement that a news item was published in the Tribune dated 28.8.1997 under the heading; "Industry - Ludhiana's boon & Bane." The said news item contained various details of contamination of water till a depth of 100 feet in large pockets of the city. It was also stated in the news item that underground water near Budha Nallah shows bacterial contamination, which comes from the sewerage maintained by the Municipal Corporation and that this Nallah has become an open sewer. Besides, the said news item in so far as the sewer problem in Ludhiana is concerned states as follows :-
"On the community pollution problem, the report says though the Municipal Corporation is supposed to take care of the garbage and treat, it has failed to provide a proper system to dispose of the garbage and treat the sewage and even the conveyance systems are not adequate, resulting in the widespread stagnation of waste water. This aspect has been provided for in the Sutlej Action Plan, which is likely to be completed by the year 2001.
X X X For completing the sewerage requirements, providing treatment units and lining the Budha nullah, the Municipal Corporation and the Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board are bound to complete the job by 2001 under the Sutlej Action Plan."
10. This news item was treated as public interest litigation and was numbered as C.W.P. 1287 of 1997. From the said news item, it appears that the government formed its opinion to acquire the land for the purpose mentioned in the notification under Section 4 of the Act.
11. Writ petition No. 1287 of 1997 came to be disposed of on 5.2.1998 before this Court and the order reads as under:
"After having heard the learned counsel for the respondents and perusing the written statements and Sutlej Action Plan prepared by the State Government, this writ petition has become infructuous in view of the pleas taken in the written statements. However, it is directed that Sutlej Action Plan, prepared by the State Government, be implemented expeditiously preferably within a period of three years.
12. In view of what has been stated above, we do not find any merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that no urgency was involved in this case. Insofar as the contention of the learned counsel that the government had not formed any opinion so as to invoke the urgency provisions is concerned, suffice it to say that the said contention is factually incorrect. In paragraph 2 of the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No. 3 and 4, it has been specifically averred that under Section 17(2)(c) of the Land Acquisition (Punjab Amendment) Act, II of 1954, in the opinion of the Government the requirement of land was/is for a public purpose. The entire material such as Pre-feasabilty Report, detailed Project Report, Survey Report of the Punjab Pollution Control Board etc. were available with the Government when the decision to invoke the provisions of Section 17(2)(c) of the Act was taken.
13. We find no merit in the last ground pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since sufficient time had elapsed when declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued, therefore, the petitioners should not have been deprived of their legal right to file objections under Section 5-A of the Act, as a period of one and half months or little more is not such a period which can be said to be a long one and taken as a bar for issuing declaration under Section 6 of the Act. The apex Court in recent judgment in Jai Narain and Ors. etc. etc. v. Union of India and Ors., A.I.R. 1996 Supreme Court 697, in similar circumstances where the period was three months held the same was not long enough to invalidate the notifications. We find no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed.