Restitution of acquired land denied where vested property remained for public use and later challenge was barred by res judicata.

Land acquired for a public purpose and vested in the Municipality free from encumbrances could not be restored to the erstwhile owners merely because it later remained surplus or was proposed for another public purpose. The prior acquisition had been completed through notification, award and taking of possession, and payment of compensation at market value did not create any right to restitution. The later challenge was also barred by res judicata and constructive res judicata, as the matter had already been conclusively decided. Relief was therefore refused and the subsequent writ petition was held not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the land acquired for a public purpose could be directed to be restored to the erstwhile owners after it had vested in the Municipality free from encumbrances, and whether the second writ petition was barred by res judicata or constructive res judicata.

Analysis: The land was acquired pursuant to notification under Section 126(4) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act and an award was made under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; possession had already been taken and the land had vested in the Municipality. The existence of surplus land did not create a right in the former owners to seek restitution, because acquired land once vested for a public purpose could be utilised for another public purpose. The prior writ proceedings and the subsequent challenge also attracted the bar of res judicata, and there was no basis to compel restoration to the erstwhile owners after payment of compensation at market value.

Conclusion: The request for restitution of the acquired land was rejected, and the second writ petition was rightly held not maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The refusal of relief to the petitioners was upheld and the special leave petitions were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Land acquired for a public purpose and vested in the acquiring body free from encumbrances cannot be restored to the erstwhile owner merely because it later remains surplus or is proposed for another public purpose; a subsequent challenge is also barred where the matter has already been conclusively decided.

---