Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. It is submitted that there was no need for making such modification and the power is exercised for extraneous purpose or that it is colourable exercise of power. It is submitted that the draft development plan remained pending with the Government from the year 1980 upto the year 1985. Some time in April, 1985 the Government suggested modification reserving the land for GIDC housing, and taking it out from the agricultural zone. The affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of GIDC discloses that there were about 319 allotment applications for about 7 lac sq. mts. of land. 102 applications for allotment of industrial sheds were pending for want of land in Sachin area. 118 applications for different housing quarters were pending for Pandesara and Katargam industrial estates. These villages are in the vicinity of each other. Much of the sim tal land of village Ichhapur to which the petitioners belong have also been allotted as per the Government directions. This is so disclosed in para 5 of the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of GIDC. Again, reference may be made to the total area (722 sq. kmts) covered by the development plan. As disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Government, a huge industrial complex which may involve investment to the extent of 6000 to 8000 crores of rupees is envisaged. As disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of GIDC in all land of 920 survey numbers of village Ichhapur is under acquisition. Owners of only about 133 survey numbers have challenged the development plan and the acquisition proceedings. Rest of the agriculturists owning other survey numbers have not challenged the acquisition, la connection with this area there are about 319 applications for allotment pending with GIDC. It appears that only 43 scattered plots were available for allotment. About 36.12 hectares of land have been allotted to Gas Authority of India, and about 39.76 hectares of land is allotted to Indian Oil Corporation. It is also disclosed that about 291.63 hectares of land is allotted to an industrial house in private sector. It is further disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply that there is still demand for land for industrial sheds.

11. This decision of the Government to introduce the variation was not without purpose. A committee headed by Mr. Lavrajkumar was appointed for fixing the land-fall point for gas pipeline. This Committee fixed the point at Ubhrat 18 kms. away in the southern direction from Surat. On account of the fixation of this land-fall point huge area of land in the vicinity thereof was required for the purpose of obnoxious and hazardous industries. As disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply, Hazira Development Area is also just near village Ichhapur wherein the land belonging to the petitioners is situate. Justification for the variation is also found from the facts disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of GIDC. As stated hereinabove, out of 920 survey numbers which are under acquisition, owners of 133 survey numbers only have challenged the plan and the acquisition proceedings. Some land has already been allotted by GIDC out of the land of village Ichhapur. Number of applications are pending with GIDC demanding land for industrial sheds.

14. Acquisition of the land is challenged on the ground that the land under acquisition is rich fertile land and other land is available for the same purpose. The submission is based without substantiating the same by placing relevant material on the record. On the contrary as disclosed in the affidavit-in-reply, the entire area is required for GIDC and the same is reserved for hazardous and obnoxious industries. Simply because the land is rich and fertile it cannot be said that the land be excluded from acquisition. If such land is acquired, compensation will be paid on the basis of the market value which will be determined by taking into account even the richness of the land. The land acquisition officer and the Courts are required to take into consideration amongst other factors, even the fertility of the land in question while determining the market price. If one looks at the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of GIDC it becomes evident that GIDC has utilised considerable portion of the land. GIDC is in fact in need of further land. It may be noted that owners of only 133 survey numbers out of 920 survey numbers of the same, village have challenged the development plan and the acquisition proceedings. Therefore it cannot be said that the owners of roughly about 300 survey numbers of land would be owning less fertile land in the same village. As indicated hereinabove on account of the general development of the area and having regard to the wider and longer perspective in view and taking the needs of the society into consideration it may be that individual interest may have to be subordinated to the wider social and public interest. Again, for the land under acquisition the petitioners would be suitably compensated. Therefore the ground that because the land is rich agricultural land the same should not be acquired has no merits.

15. Vague allegation is made that other land is available. Therefore, it is submitted this land should not be acquired. However this allegation has no factual basis. In fact it is shown that almost entire land of 'sim tal' of village Ichhapur is under acquisition. It is also not correct to say that GIDC is unable to develop the land. On the contrary GIDC needs further lands. Materials placed on the record by GIDC disclose that industrial sheds have been developed and there are number of applications pending with GIDC.