Land acquisition under urban improvement law upheld where no Chapter V scheme was required and stay period excluded from limitation.

Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 was held to permit acquisition even without a Chapter V scheme framed by the Trust, because the statutory power extended to land needed for improvement or other purposes under the Act. The acquisition notice was also found valid: the Government had applied its mind, and the stated purposes for development and construction were sufficiently specified at the notification stage. The acquisition did not lapse for delay in making the award, because the period during which the proceedings were stayed by court order was excluded from limitation. The acquisition proceedings and notifications were upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the State could acquire land under Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 without a scheme framed by the Trust under Chapter V; (ii) Whether the formation of opinion and specification of purpose in the acquisition notice were sufficient under Section 52; (iii) Whether the acquisition lapsed for want of an award within the period prescribed after the 1987 amendment.

Issue (i): Whether the State could acquire land under Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 without a scheme framed by the Trust under Chapter V.

Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguished between improvement undertaken by the Trust and improvement undertaken by the Government. Section 29 made scheme-making mandatory when the Trust itself acted, but Section 72 contemplated improvement by Government departments as well. Section 52 authorized acquisition where, on a representation from the Trust or otherwise, the State Government considered land required for improvement or any other purpose under the Act. The power was therefore not confined to acquisition for implementation of a pre-existing scheme framed under Chapter V.

Conclusion: The requirement of a Chapter V scheme was not a condition precedent to acquisition under Section 52, and this contention failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the formation of opinion and specification of purpose in the acquisition notice were sufficient under Section 52.

Analysis: The notice stated that the land was required for a development plan and for construction of residential, commercial and administrative buildings. Section 52 required the State Government to form an opinion that the land was needed for improvement or any other purpose under the Act, but did not require a detailed project plan at the stage of notification. The record showed application of mind by the Government before issuance of notice. The notices also sufficiently identified the purpose having regard to the large extent of land proposed to be acquired.

Conclusion: The acquisition was supported by a valid administrative satisfaction and adequate specification of purpose, so the challenge on this ground failed.

Issue (iii): Whether the acquisition lapsed for want of an award within the period prescribed after the 1987 amendment.

Analysis: Section 60A of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, as inserted by the 1987 amendment, made the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 applicable. Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 excluded from limitation the period during which proceedings were stayed by a court. The acquisition proceedings had remained under interim stay throughout material periods, so the time spent under the stay could not be counted for computing the period for making the award.

Conclusion: The acquisition did not lapse on the ground of non-making of the award within two years, and this contention failed.

Final Conclusion: The acquisition proceedings were upheld, the challenge to the notifications failed, and the appeals were dismissed.

---