I . L . R .
1995 KAR 1962
J . S. VERMA, N.P. SINGH & S.P. BHARUCHA, JJ
H.M.T. House Building Co-operative Society Vs Syed Khader
Paragraph ( 20 ) In the present case, a hybrid procedure appears to heave been followed. Initially, the appellant Society through M/s. S. R. Constructions purported to acquire the lands by negotiation and sale by the land holders. Then from terms of the Agreement dated 17-03-1988, it appears that the procedure prescribed in Part-VII was to be followed and the lands were to be acquired at the cost of the appellant Society treating it to be a "company". The allegation made on behalf of the appellant Society that the Housing Scheme had been approved by the appropriate Government on 07-11-1984 shall not be deemed to be a prior approval within the meaning of Section 3(f) ( vi ) but an order giving previous consent as required by Section 39 of Part - VII of the Act. In the Agreement dated 17-03-1988 it has been specifically stated "And whereas the Government having caused inquiry to be made in conformity with the provisions of the said Act and being satisfied as a result of such inquiry that the acquisition of the said land is needed for the purpose referred to above has consented to the provisions of the said Act being in force in order to acquire the said land for the benefit of the society members to enter in the agreement hereinafter contained with the Government".
( emphasis supplied ) But, ultimately, the lands have been acquired on behalf of the appropriate Government treating the requirement of the appellant Society as for a public purpose within the meaning of section 3(f) ( vi ).
LAND ACQUISITION QUASHED & ORDERED TO RETURN LANDS TO ITS ERSTWHILE LAND-OWNERS ; IF SO WHY NOT IN THE CASE OF JUDGES HOUSING SOCIETY / JUDICIAL LAY-OUT " PLOT for PLOT " ? Same Agreement , Year, Govt., ; only Members are Judges / Law Secretaries .!