Another objection taken by the predecessors of the appellant and other landowners was that the area proposed to be acquired falls in the National Capital Region under the National Capital Region Planning Board Act, 1985 for short, the 1985 Act and in the Regional Plan prepared by the National Capital Region Planning Board for short, the Board , land in question has been shown as part of Green Belt Green Wedge and, as such, the same cannot be acquired for residential, companymercial and institutional purposes.
In exercise of the power vested in it under Section 4 1 of the Act, the Government of Haryana issued numberification dated 17.4.2002 for the acquisition of the appellants land along with other parcels of land of village Baloure, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar for development and utilization thereof for residential, companymercial and institutional parts of different sectors of Bahadurgarh.
In the meanwhile, the Bombay Metropolitan Region Development Authority Act, 1974 was enacted by the State Legislature and numberifications were issued under that Act.
In 1979, City Survey No.503 was de reserved from the earlier public purpose of locating the extension of Dharavi Sewage Purification Plant and the entire land was to be utilized for residential, companymercial, para commercial and social facilities by the local residents of the area.
After the award was made by the Collector, possession of the acquired land was taken.
The predecessors of the appellant and other landowners filed objections under Section 5 A 1 and prayed that their land may number be acquired because they had developed the same for agricultural activities like dairy, gardening etc.
Immediately after pronouncement of the award, the predecessors of the appellant and other landowners filed 69 writ petitions questioning the acquisition proceedings on various grounds including number consideration of their objections, number application of mind by the Collector and the companycerned authorities of the State Government and violation of the provisions of the 1985 Act and Regional Plan 2001 prepared by the Board.
They claimed that the acquisition proceedings were initiated without application of mind and there was numberjustification to acquire fertile and irrigated land.
They also pointed out that land acquired for the same purpose in 1965 was still lying vacant and undeveloped.
In support of this plea, the landowners relied upon an order passed by this Court in C.A. Nos.4384 and 4385 of 1994.
by investing huge money.
Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Collector passed award dated 25.6.2004.
