Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7184 of 2013 ====================================================== Rooafza Khatoon, widow of Late Md. Isa, resident of village Musachak, Police Station – Bairgania, District - Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector, Sitamarhi 3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gandak Project, Muzaffarpur Versus .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Khatim Raza For the Respondent/State : Government Pleader No. 23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 29-04-2013 Heard Mr. Khatim Raza, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to Government Pleader No. 23. The petitioner, in the present writ petition has prayed for quashing of an order dated 24/11/2012 passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 67 of 2012 by the Collector, Sitamarhi, whereby, learned Collector, has rejected the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). It has further been prayed for directing the concerned respondent to pay enhance compensation with interest in consonance with the award of civil court dated 7/6/1993 passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and Land Acquisition Case No. 37 of 1986 under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this court by filing a writ
Legal Reasoning
Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 2/7 petition vide CWJC No. 8527 of 2012, wherein, a prayer was made for directing the respondents to make an award under Section 28-A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 28-A(1) of the Act and further for directing the concerned respondent to pay enhanced compensation amount with interest in consonance with award / judgment passed by the learned Sub Judge , Sitamarhi, on 7/6/1993 in Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and Land Acquisition Case No. 37 of 1986 almost similar to the present
Decision
writ petition. The said writ petition was disposed of by a bench of this court by an order dated 30/4/2012 with a direction that Collector shall decide the application of the petitioner filed under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act within a period of three months from the date of receipt / production of a copy of that order. Short fact of the case is that long back on 1/5/1982 a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued for acquisition of land. Thereafter, award was prepared in the year 1984 itself, and finally, on 5/6/1984 possession of land was taken. The case of petitioner is that total land measuring 0.14 decimals of khata no. 761, plot no. 2228 was acquired and possession was taken on 5/6/1984 and award amount was Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 3/7 received by the husband of the petitioner in the year 1984 itself. Subsequently, two other land owners raised objection to the award amount, which was referred under Section 18 of the Act to the court , and finally, the said cases i.e. Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and Land Acquisition Case No. 37 of 1986 were allowed on 7/6/1993 and compensation amount was enhanced. Against the order & judgment passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and 37 of 1986, State of Bihar had preferred Appeals vide F.A. No. 642 of 1993 and F.A. No. 646 of 1993, which were finally dismissed on 13/9/2010. It has been pleaded that the petitioner, for the first time, got information regarding the judgment dated 7/6/1993 on 25/1/2012 and thereafter, on 10/2/2012 she filed an application under Section 28-A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancing compensation at par with the compensation amount of the said two Land Acquisition Cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an advanced aged Pardanashin widow, and due to the said reason, earlier, she had got no information regarding the enhancement of the compensation amount in other similarly situated cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed heavy reliance on an order passed by this court in similar Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 4/7 circumstances in CWJC No. 4579 of 2003 (Jewesh Prasad & Others Vs The State of Bihar & Others), which was disposed of on 28/7/2003. Copy of order has been brought on record as Annexure -7 to the writ petition. It has been pleaded that in the same land acquisition proceeding, one another person had filed a petition for enhancement of the compensation amount, which was dismissed on the ground of limitation itself. The said order was assailed and a co-ordinate bench of this court has quashed the order and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to dispose of the case on merit with a reasoned order. He submits that the case of petitioner is almost identical to the case of Jewesh Prasad & Others (Supra), and as such, the order impugned, which has been passed by the Collector, Sitamarhi, may be set aside. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer of the petitioner. Fact remains that in the present case land acquisition proceeding was initiated long back in the year 1982, and after payment of the compensation amount to petitioner’s husband, possession of land was taken on 5/6/1984, which has been admitted in the writ petition. In this case award was prepared in the year 1984 and the husband of the petitioner, without any objection, received the award /compensation amount. It is true that out of same acquisition proceeding two other persons had Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 5/7 raised objection under Section 18 of the Act, which was referred to the court, and finally, award and compensation amount was enhanced on 7/6/1993. The plea of the petitioner that the claim of the petitioner was not required to be rejected on the ground of limitation appears to be not sustainable in the eye of law. Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to quote Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, which is as follows:- of the amount [28-A. Re-determination of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court.-(1) Where in an award under this Part , the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11, the persons, interested in all other land covered by the same notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re- determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court: Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this sub – section, the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. (2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub – section (1), conduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and make an award determining the amount of compensation payable to the applicants. (3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub – section (2) may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court and the provisions of Sections 18 to 28 shall, so far as may be, apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under Section Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 6/7 18.] Section 28-A of the Act itself clarifies that within three months from the date of award in a separate case in one acquisition proceeding an aggrieved person can file a petition. It is a fact that no such petition was filed after the compensation amount was enhanced in the year 1993. The order passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and 37 of 1986 were assailed by the State of Bihar in First Appeals, which too, were rejected in the year 2010. Even then, no petition was filed, and now, after expiry of about 20 years, a petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner taking parity of compensation amount in view of Land Acquisition Case No. 33 of 1986 and 37 of 1986. So far Annexure -7 is concerned, it is true that this court had directed for passing order on merit, but fact remains that the said order too was passed long back in the year 2003. Moreover, vide Annexure – 7, no law was enunciated, but it was an order in persona having no binding effect. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the court is of the opinion that while rejecting the petition filed under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act of the petitioner, the learned Collector has committed no error. Patna High Court CWJC No.7184 of 2013 (3) dt.29-04-2013 7/7 The court is of the opinion that if such petitions are entertained at such a belated stage, there will be no end. In number of cases in which the land owner, who has already received compensation amount long back in the year 1984, either he or his heirs will be filing such petitions without any interruption. I do not find any ground for interference. The writ petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/-