Devindera Nath Giri v. State of J&K & Ors.

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 05.04.2022

Heard Sh. Aditya Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sh. S.S.Nanda, learned Senior Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents.

We have perused the affidavit filed on behalf of the Police Department, i.e., respondent No. 6 as well as the report submitted by Sh. Nanda.

The petitioner by means of this writ petition is claiming payment of compensation as per the award passed by respondent No. 3 on 29.10.2008 in respect of the land that was acquired.

According to the award, the petitioner is entitled to compensation of ₹ 84, 18,000/- for the acquired land out of which certain amount was paid and the balance of ₹ 75,47,680/- remained to be paid.

The stand of the Revenue is that the balance compensation could not be paid to the petitioner as the indenting department has not made available the necessary fund. 2 OWP No. 1801 of 2014

The respondent No. 6, Senior Superintendent of Police, Rajouri, in his affidavit, has stated that the Police Department had acquired 18 kanals and 06 marlas of land situated at village Rampur, Tehsil and District Rajouri for the purpose of raising of permanent structures including residential quarters. The acquisition proceedings have been initiated in the year 1988 as per the final award. The Police Department has taken up the matter with the Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri and it has been stated that excessive compensation has been awarded and that the Police Department has been unnecessarily penalized.

The issue as to who is liable to pay the compensation is more or less stands settled. The compensation has to be provided by the indenting department and it has to be paid through the acquiring department, i.e., the Revenue. The Revenue can not make the payment until and unless the necessary amount is made available by the indenting department.

It is also settled that the award is in the shape of an offer on behalf of the acquiring body and the beneficiary and that the said offer made on their behalf is not liable to be questioned by them. It is only the person interested in the compensation, if aggrieved, that he may prefer a reference for the enhancement. The Police Department for whom the land has been acquired has no right under law to dispute the compensation offered or the correctness of the award. The award is final and conclusive insofar as the respondents are concerned.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the award as made has to be implemented in pith and substance without any delay. We do not find any justification on part of any of the respondents in not making the payment of 3 OWP No. 1801 of 2014 compensation to the petitioner as it amounts to deprivation of property without fair compensation.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed and a writ in the nature of mandamus is issued to all the respondents commanding them to make payment of the entire balance amount of compensation with statutory interest as per Section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1990, in accordance with the award dated 29.10.2008, within a period of six weeks from today and the Police Department shall make available the necessary fund for the above purpose within a period of one month. Even if the Police Department fails to provide the funds, the Revenue shall make the payment and recover it from the Police Department with interest.

Since the Police Department has failed in providing the necessary fund for the payment of compensation to the petitioner for the last fourteen years, we impose damages of ₹14.00 lacs upon it to be paid in addition to the above compensation and interest for the loss caused due to delay. The damages shall be paid to the petitioner within three months.