Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashes land acquisition since notice was published only in English paper

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently quashed the acquisition of 134 kanals of land for construction of an amusement park after it found that the mandatory procedure under Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act was not followed (Rattan Chand V/s Union Territory of J&K)..Justice Sanjay Dhar noted that the public notice under Section 4(1) of the State Act was published only in an English newspaper and not in any regional-language newspaper. The single-judge also found that the notice was not published in the Government Gazette or affixed at convenient place or made known to the interested persons of the locality by beating of drums or through local Panchayats and Patwari."The procedure prescribed for publication of notice under Section 4 of the State land Acquisition Act as contained in the said provision is mandatory and all the modes for publication mentioned therein are to be followed. But, in the instant case the record does not suggest that excepting publication of the notice in one newspaper of English language, the other modes of publication have been followed by the respondent-Collector. On this ground alone, the acquisition proceedings are liable to be quashed," the Court ruled. .The judgment was filed on a plea challenging the final award issued by the Collector Land Acquisition in 2019. The amusement park, for which the land was acquired, was to be constructed in Village Abdal (Nai Basti), Tehsil Suchetgarh, District Jammu. .In response, the Collector Land Acquisition submitted that the petitioners were only tenants on the land which has been claimed to be owned by J&K Dharmarth Trust Council. The council also sought a direction that amount of compensation be not released in favour of any other person, the Court was told..The Bench found that the petitioners were mentioned as occupants of the land in the documents and thus, were entitled to file objections to the acquisition. It further found that the mandatory procedure for publication of the notice was not followed in the case and that the petitioners were not heard before passing of the award."The claim of the petitioners that they never knew about the acquisition proceedings get strengthened from the fact that the record does not contain any objections from them. Thus, there was no question of consideration of their objections by the Collector in terms of Section 5-A of the State Act. Obviously, their right of hearing has been breached in the instant case.".The Court also observed that the Collector seems to have not followed the procedure after receiving a communication from the Dharmath Trust that it has no objection to acquisition of the land in case compensation is provided to it."It appears that respondent No. 5 has remained satisfied with the said communication of the Dharmarth Trust and did not take steps to serve the requisite notices under various provisions of the State Land Acquisition Act upon the petitioners, who are admittedly tenants/occupiers of the land in question. Thus, mandatory provisions of the State Land Acquisition Act have been observed by the Collector in breach thereby, vitiating the acquisition proceedings including the impugned award," the single-judge held..Accordingly, the Court quashed the award with a direction to initiate fresh proceedings for acquisition of the land in question under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. .Advocate SM Chowdhary appeared for the petitioners.Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli with Assisting Counsel Sagira Jaffar represented the respondents.[Read Judgment]