Express News Service
NEW DELHI: In a giant order, the Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed appeals filed by Odisha authorities and Anil Agarwal Foundation and upheld Orissa High Court’s 2010 decision of quashing the land acquisition for establishing Vedanta University alongside Puri-Konark marine drive.
The acquisition was of about 6,000 acres of land belonging to about 6,000 households that affected roughly 30,000 people. The SC well-known that each one the acquisition proceedings bought right here to be initiated on the event of the Vedanta Foundation and by no means by the use of the state.
It extra acknowledged that Anil Agarwal Foundation’s act of fixing the standing of the company from private to public agency was a “mala fide exercise”. While dismissing the plea, the SC imposed a value of Rs 5 lakh to be deposited by Anil Agarwal Foundation with the courtroom docket registrar inside a interval of six weeks. Pursuant to the deposit, it directed transferring of the equivalent to Odisha State Legal Services Authority. Taking observe of the actual fact the Odisha authorities had acquired the land in utter disregard to the associated provisions of the Act and tips, a bench of Justices MR Shah and Krishna Murari acknowledged there was full non-application of ideas by the state. “The state government could not have considered the proposal from only one beneficiary/ trust. There may be other public trusts/companies who might be interested in establishing such a university.
Even no proper inquiry seems to have been initiated by the government/collector while considering the proposal by the beneficiary company,” the apex courtroom docket acknowledged. Castigating the Odisha authorities, the SC acknowledged a really highly effective aspect, which is required to be considered is the non-application of ideas by the federal authorities on environmental sides and passing of two rivers from the acquired lands in question.
“It is not in dispute that from the lands in question, two rivers namely ‘Nuanai’ and ‘Nala’ are flowing which as such were acquired by the state government. How the maintenance of the rivers etc. can be handed over to the beneficiary company. If the lands in question are continued to be acquired by the beneficiary company, the control of the rivers would be with the said private company which would violate the Doctrine of Public Trust. Even requiring the beneficiary company to maintain the flow of above two rivers may also affect the residents of the locality at large,” the bench observed.
In 2010, the Orissa HC whereas quashing the impugned land acquisition proceedings along with the notifications beneath Sections 4(1) and 6 and the awards handed throughout the Land Acquisition Proceedings for the acquisition of land in favour of Anil Agarwal Foundation had acknowledged that the equivalent was in “flagrant violation” of the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The HC had moreover directed for restoring the possession of acquired lands to the respective land householders. The landowners have been moreover directed to refund the portions acquired by them as compensation or in every other case in respect of their lands.
The HC had moreover quashed the grant of presidency land in favour of the beneficiary agency beneath Rule 5 of the Government Land Settlement Rules with a course to the state authorities to resume the lands which have been granted to the beneficiary agency by the use of lease.
NEW DELHI: In a giant order, the Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed appeals filed by Odisha authorities and Anil Agarwal Foundation and upheld Orissa High Court’s 2010 decision of quashing the land acquisition for establishing Vedanta University alongside Puri-Konark marine drive.
The acquisition was of about 6,000 acres of land belonging to about 6,000 households that affected roughly 30,000 people. The SC well-known that each one the acquisition proceedings bought right here to be initiated on the event of the Vedanta Foundation and by no means by the use of the state.
It extra acknowledged that Anil Agarwal Foundation’s act of fixing the standing of the company from private to public agency was a “mala fide exercise”. While dismissing the plea, the SC imposed a value of Rs 5 lakh to be deposited by Anil Agarwal Foundation with the courtroom docket registrar inside a interval of six weeks. Pursuant to the deposit, it directed transferring of the equivalent to Odisha State Legal Services Authority. Taking observe of the actual fact the Odisha authorities had acquired the land in utter disregard to the associated provisions of the Act and tips, a bench of Justices MR Shah and Krishna Murari acknowledged there was full non-application of ideas by the state. “The state authorities could not have considered the proposal from only one beneficiary/ perception. There may be completely different public trusts/companies who could possibly be involved about establishing such a school.
Even no right inquiry seems to have been initiated by the federal authorities/collector whereas considering the proposal by the beneficiary agency,” the apex courtroom docket acknowledged. Castigating the Odisha authorities, the SC acknowledged a really highly effective aspect, which is required to be considered is the non-application of ideas by the federal authorities on environmental sides and passing of two rivers from the acquired lands in question.googletag.cmd.push(carry out() googletag.present(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); );
“It is not in dispute that from the lands in question, two rivers namely ‘Nuanai’ and ‘Nala’ are flowing which as such were acquired by the state government. How the maintenance of the rivers etc. can be handed over to the beneficiary company. If the lands in question are continued to be acquired by the beneficiary company, the control of the rivers would be with the said private company which would violate the Doctrine of Public Trust. Even requiring the beneficiary company to maintain the flow of above two rivers may also affect the residents of the locality at large,” the bench observed.
In 2010, the Orissa HC whereas quashing the impugned land acquisition proceedings along with the notifications beneath Sections 4(1) and 6 and the awards handed throughout the Land Acquisition Proceedings for the acquisition of land in favour of Anil Agarwal Foundation had acknowledged that the equivalent was in “flagrant violation” of the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The HC had moreover directed for restoring the possession of acquired lands to the respective land householders. The landowners have been moreover directed to refund the portions acquired by them as compensation or in every other case in respect of their lands.
The HC had moreover quashed the grant of presidency land in favour of the beneficiary agency beneath Rule 5 of the Government Land Settlement Rules with a course to the state authorities to resume the lands which have been granted to the beneficiary agency by the use of lease.
