1. This matter arises out of the acquisition of land for the establishment of Small Industries Estate-II, Sialkot. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 22-8-1989.
2. Landowners' objections under sections 5 and 5-A of the Act were dispensed with by the Commissioner vide his order dated 18-6-1990 in exercise of powers under section 17(4) ibid. 2.Aggrieved by the aforesaid Notification Ranjha and '153 persons all claiming to be the residents/landowners of Mauza Jethikey, Tehsil Daska, District Sialkot preferred Writ Petition No,5586 of 1990 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore which was withdrawn by them on 30-10-1990 for moving a petition before the Board of Revenue for redressal of their grievances. (The Board of Revenue was not a party in the aforesaid Writ Petition). The application was moved on 4-4-1991 and a notice was issued to the two of the respondents viz. Small Industries Corporation, Sialkot and Sialkot Chamber of Commerce and Industries. However, earlier the Board of Revenue had accorded its approval to the estimated cost of the land measuring 875 Kanals 14 Marlas for Rs,1,05,92,095.47 inclusive of 15% compulsory acquisition charges.
3. 3.The parties were heard in the Chamber on 24-4-1991 where Dr. A. Basit, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners maintained that the proposed site for the Industries Estate No,II is owned by about 155 petty landowners having two to four Kanals each. As compared to this area the land adjacent to the proposed Small Industries Estate No,III in the same village the number of the landowners was very small. If the latter area were to be acquired for the Small Industries Estate No,II also, there will be lesser displacement of the people. In the alternative vacant land across the Railway line may be utilized for the project. The Small Industries Corporation and Sialkot Chamber of Commerce and Industries opposed the proposal and after some lengthy arguments it was decided that the Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue may visit the site and take a decision thereafter.
4. 4.The Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue accompanied by the Commissioner, Gujranwala Division and Deputy Commissioner, Sialkot visited the site situated on the main Sialkot-Wazirabad Roau, about 19 K.M. From Sialkot. The Small Industries Corporation was represented by Mr. Muhammad Ashfaq Mirza, Deputy Director while Sialkot Chamber of Commerce and Industries was represented through Khawaja Zaka-ud-Din its President and Dr. Muhammad Aslam Dar, Convener of Industrial Estates Committee and Ex-Vice-President, Sialkot Chamber of Commerce and Industies. About 500 landowners and interested persons were also present alongwith Revenue Officials with record.
5. 5.Four persons raised objections on behalf of landowners i,e, Mr. Muhammad Azam Nagra, Advocate, Mr. Mukhtar Ahmad, Advocate, Mr. Muhammad Mushtaq Ghumman, Muhammad Sadiq and Habib Ullah landowners. The following two main objections were advanced by them:--
(i) Many small landowners owning 2 to 8 Kanals of land would be affected and displaced. The proposed compensation for the land to be acquired for the Estate, is insufficient and the affected landowners would be deprived of their livelihood. The proposed land was very fertile, whereas the Small Industries Corporation should acquire less fertile or Banjar land which was available adjacent to the village across the road towards the South of the village and the road and also across the Railway line further South. There was waste land also available in villages Amrikpur and Halokey.
(ii) The compensation being proposed for their land was based on the prices prevailing during the year 1982-83, whereas the present market value of the land ranges between Rs,6,000 to Rs,12,000 per maria. The land near the road and near the village was mostly sold for residential purposes and was very expensive. The landowners also furnished photo copies of various transactions in support of their arguments.
6. 6.The representatives of Small Industries Corporation and Sialkot Chamber of Commerce stated that attempts had been made in the year 1980 to acquire land for the Small Industries Estate but each time their efforts were foiled by the interested landowners. Establishment of industries would result in development of the area and in providing job opportunities to the people. If the proposed land were to be given up then a new notice under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act will have to be issued and in the meanwhile prices of land had gone up due to speculation by interested landowners. Sufficient land was not available in the vicinity of the village and most of the area was flood-affected. New feasibility studies will have to be carried out which apart from delaying the project would also push up the prices and in any case there was no guarantee that the landowners of the new site will not resist the acquisition of the land.
7. 7.After hearing the objections of the landowners and replies of the respondents and after examining the record, the proposed sites were inspected alongwith the landowners and other persons. The proposed alternative site No,1 lying between Sialkot-Wazirabad Road and the Railway line consists of narrow strip of land about 5 to 6 acres wide. It is situated in the same village and land appears to be less fertile than the site in dispute. However, this site if acquired for the purpose will become too long as the length would extend to 17 acres (about 700 yards) which would increase the developmental cost as it would not be in a shape of square which economizes on such costs as roads, Sewers, telephone, electricity etc. It is also not certain whether the concerned landowners would agree to part with this land. In any case in view of the value of the land near the road going up between the publication of the notice under section 4 and now the cost would be many times more.
8. 8.The next proposed site lies across the railway line and it appears to be inferior as far as quality of land is concerned as compared to the other two sites. The objections related to the proposed alternative site No,1 would also be applicable to this site. It is also not certain that this site is not affected by flood. However, the main drawback would be that a level crossing on the railway line and a connected metalled road will have to be constructed for approaching the site before undertaking any developmental work. The Pakistan Railway does not easily agree to the construction of level crossings and apart from charging the cost involved, it usually takes a long time to construct the level crossing. All facilities such as telephone lines and electricity lines-will have to go over the railway line for which permission will have to be separately sought. Considering the time span required for completing these formalities, it appears that the project would be inordinately delayed apart from the escalating the cost. It is to be noted in particular that the higher price of land after publication of notice under section 4 would equally be applicable in this case.
9. 9.The present site is located in a compact shape and near the WAPDA grid,station. It is on the main road and well away from the village abadi itself. The plea of the landowners that it was situated too near the village is incorrect. It is at least two hundred yards away from the village abadi. Next to it is the proposed site for the Small Industries Estate No,III, which means that all the facilities and services like roads, sewers, telephone, electricity etc. Can be linked together to reduce the cost and to ensure optimum efficiency. Electricity can readily be provided by WAPDA from its grid station.
10. Being situated on main metalled road immediate access without construction of internal roads is not a problem. The price, approved earlier by the Board of Revenue, also appears to be fair and is based on the prescribed formula of average sale price for the preceding one year. The cost of 84 Kanals 5 Marlas land near the road has been assessed at Rs,1,196.58 per Marla whereas the cost of the rest of the land i,e, 791 Kanals 9 Marlas between the road from village Abadi has been assessed at Rs,454.50 per Marla i,e, due weightage has been given to more valuable land near the road.
11. There is no Nian land included in this acquisition, the accepted definition of Nian land is the land situated near village abadi within a radius of 5 acres and the proposed site does not infringe this belt. Some of the Registration deeds produced by the landowners relate to the period after issue of the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and hence are not eligible:-- S.No, Sale Deed No,/Date Khasra Nos, Area Sold Total Price Price per Marla
(i) 72/1 6-1-90Plot 16 M Rs, 1,38,000 Rs, 8,625
(ii) 786/1 9-3-911729 20 M Rs, 1,02,000 Rs, 5,100
(iii) 1372/1 27-4-912255 5 M Rs, 16,500 Rs, 3,300
(iv) 1618/1 26-5-912264,2263 & 2333 24 K 11 M Rs, 15,40,800 Rs, 3,200
(i) 2768/1 27-7-881331 10 M Rs, 88,000 Rs, 8,800
(ii) 2767/1 27-7-881332 11 M Rs, 88,000 Rs, 8,000
(iii) 2294/1 9-8-87Khewat No, 331 Khatauni No, 546, Khasra20 M Rs, 1,00,000 Rs,5,000 pertain to the land in the Nian area of the village. The land in the proposed site is being decidedly used for agricultural purposes and so far no residential/commercial buildings are in existence except a few deras. The remaining registered deeds do not appear to have been presented for effecting mutations and were not taken into consideration while working out average sale price for the relevant period. The responsibility for this lapse lies on the landowners themselves and not the revenue functionaries.
10. The argument of the learned counsel regarding displacement of population is no doubt very valid but this displacement would take place wherever the industrial estate comes. In the process of economic development of a country some displacement is inevitable. However, the job opportunities opened after establishment of industries would compensate the landowners to a very large extent. The setting up of the industries would also result in the increase of the prices of their remaining land as is evident from the registered deeds produced by the landowners themselves after the issue of the Notification under section 4. Many commercial opportunities such as construction, carriage, transport, catering, etc. And opening of small shops would also be created and I do not think that on the whole the affected landowners would be losers in the long run.
12. 11.However, in order to give the affected landowners added incentive for creation of industrial estates, the Punjab Small Industries Corporation may consider offering them industrial plots in the proposed Estates Nos.Il or III in ratio to the land acquired from them. If necessary the Small Industries Corporation may acquire some more land for making the affected landowners partners in developmental process in their present and future Schemes. I am sanguine that the implementation of this suggestion would not only reduce resistance to acquisition of land but also accelerate the process of development.
13. 12.With the foregoing observation the application stands disposed of and the status quo issued earlier is recalled.