Land Acquisition Act, Section 4, sub-sections (1) and (2)-Initiation of proceedings under, a valid notification sine qua non- Delay in moving the Court-Effect.

Land Acquisition Act, Section 23 and Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 19(1)(f) 31(2) and 31(5)-Compensation with reference to value of property on the date of notification under sec. 4-Adequacy of compensation, challenge of Challenge confined only to question of procedural reasonableness,

Delhi Development Act, sections 12 and 15-Planned development of Delhi to be in accordance with the Act Central Govt., if precluded from acquiring land for planned development-Laches and acquiescence on the part of the petitioners Effect.

Land Acquisition Act, Section 3(a) and Part VII-Acquisition of land for planned development of Delhi-Landing over a portion of the acquired property to co-operative housing societies Provisions of Part VII of the Act, whether attracted.

A notification under sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on Nov. 13, 1959, stating that an area of 34,070 acres of land was needed for a public purpose, viz. the planned development of Delhi. Between 1959 and 1961, about six thousand objections were filed under sec. 5A of the Act. The objections were overruled. On March 18, 1966, the declaration under sec. 6 of the Act was published in respect of a portion of the area. Therefore, in 1970, notices were issued under sac. 9(1) of the Act requiring the appellants to state their objections, if any, to the assessment of compensation. The appellants thereupon challenged the validity of proceedings for acquisition before the High Court of Dell. The High Court negatived their contentions and dis- missed the writ petitions. In the writ petitions and civil appeals filed in the Supreme Court it was contended (i) The public purpose specified in the notification issued under sec, 4, namely, the planned development of Delhi was vague as neither a Master Plan nor a Zonal Plan was in existence on the date of the notification and as the purpose specified in the notification was vague, the appellants and the petitioners were unable to exercise effectively their right under sec. 5A of the Act; (ii) As there was inordinate delay in finalising the acquisition proceedings, they were deprived of the benefit of the appreciation in the value of the property between the date of notification under sec, 4 and the date of taking possession of the property. (iii) The provisions of sec. 23 of the Act laying down that compensation should be determined with reference to the market value of the land as on the date of notification under sec. 4 was an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right of the appellants to hold and dispose of property under Article 19(1)(b); (iv) As the acquisition of the property was for the purpose of planned development of Delhi, the only authority competent to issue the notification under sec. 4 was the Central Govt. under sec. 15 of Delhi Development Act and since the proceedings were initiated by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi, the proceedings were ab initio invalid; and (v) The acquisition was not for any public purpose, but for companies as the major portion of the land acquired was allotted without any development to co-operative housing societies which were companies within the definition of the word "company" in the Act and as the provisions of part VII of the Act were not complied with the proceedings for acquisition were bad.

Rejecting the contention and dismissing the appeals and the petitions