{"id":336351,"date":"2024-11-30T18:00:45","date_gmt":"2024-11-30T12:30:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=336351"},"modified":"2024-12-04T17:21:23","modified_gmt":"2024-12-04T11:51:23","slug":"yamuna-expressway-supreme-court-upholds-land-acquisition-urgency-clause","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/30\/yamuna-expressway-supreme-court-upholds-land-acquisition-urgency-clause\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court upholds land acquisition for Yamuna Expressway; Justifies Invocation of Urgency Clause"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In batch of appeals arising out of the land acquisition proceedings initiated by State of Uttar Pradesh for planned development in the District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, through Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (\u2018YEIDA\u2019) by invoking \u2018urgency provisions\u2019 incorporated in Sections 17(1)<\/a> and 17(4)<\/a> of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894<\/a>,(\u2018the Act\u2019), the division bench of BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta*<\/span> , JJ. justified the State’s decision to invoke the urgency provisions under Sections 17(1)<\/a> and 17(4)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, allowing the acquisition to proceed without the usual hearing of objections under Section 5-A<\/a> of the Act<\/a> and upheld the land acquisition proceedings.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The case revolves around the land acquisition process initiated in Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, for planned development. The Director of Land Acquisition issued a notification on 26-02-2009 under Section 4(1), invoking urgency provisions under Sections 17(1)<\/a> and 17(4)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. This acquisition sought to acquire land designated as \u2018Abadi Bhoomi\u2019\u2014used by the landowners as dwelling units and for rearing cattle.<\/p>\n

The landowners opposed the acquisition, claiming that the land in question had significant social and personal value to them. They filed representations before the Chief Executive Officer of YEIDA requesting that their land not be acquired. Despite these requests, the authorities proceeded with the acquisition, issuing a notification on 19-02-2010 under Section 6<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The landowners subsequently filed multiple writ petitions before the Allahabad High Court, challenging the acquisition, particularly focusing on the invocation of Sections 4, 6, and the urgency provisions under Sections 17(1)<\/a> and 17(4)<\/a> of the Land Acquisition Act<\/a>. The High Court delivered divergent views on the matter, prompting the landowners to file the present appeal to the Supreme Court by special leave.<\/p>\n

Issues, Analysis and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court took note of the fact that the State Government had formulated a \u201cPolicy for Planned Development along the Taj Expressway\u201d and the notification to this effect was issued by the Infrastructure & Industrial Development Commissioner, Government of UP on 29-12-2007. The Policy dealt with the formation of Special Development Zone and the development thereof.<\/p>\n

After perusing the said policy, the Court noted that while the development of roads and open spaces which was to constitute 35% of the land area was considered to be the core activity, the allied activities such as commercial, institutional & amenities, roads, open and circulation areas, residential including group housing and plotted development areas were to constitute the remaining 65% of the land under the SDZ. Hence, the authorities were required to develop the entire SDZ in an integrated manner.<\/p>\n