State of Haryana & Ors. v. Khazan Singh & Ors.

Mr. Ashish Gupta, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Sudhir Aggrawal, Advocate for the respondents This judgement will dispose of R.F.A Nos. 2399 to 2411, 3430 to 3438 of 2002 arising out of same acquisition. By filing appeals the land owners are seeking enhancement of compensation whereas by filing appeals, the State is seeking reduction thereof. Briefly, the facts are that the agricultural land measuring 7.9 acres situated in village Kiloi, district Rohtak (now Jhajjar) was acquired by State of Haryana for the construction of road connecting Jhajjar to Farooqnagar via Muneempur and Kiloi vide notification dated 30.11.1984 published on 18.12.1984 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), which was followed by notification dated 29.11.1985 published on 17.12.1985 under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector'), vide award dated 22.09.1986 determined compensation payable to the land owners @ ` 20,500/- per acre for chahi and gair mumkin and ` 11,400/- per acre for bhud and banzar land. Admittedly, the possession of the land was taken on 21.12.1975. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the learned land owners filed objections before the Collector. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, R.F.A.. NO. 2399 OF 2002 2 the learned court below vide award dated 30.03.2002, determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 22,000/- per acre for chahi and gair mumkin and ` 13,000/- per acre for bhud and and banzar land, but no compensation for earlier possession was granted to the land owners. Dissatisfied with the award passed by the ADJ, Jhajjar, the land owners as well as the State are in appeal before this Court. Mr. Sudhir Aggrawal, Advocate for the land owners argued that the Ld. Lower Court has not awarded conmpensation on account of severance of their land due to acquisition and that the compensation for the period for which the possession remained with the State of Haryana before the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, has not been awarded to the land owners. Mr. Ashish Gupta, AAG, Haryana contended that the Ld. Lower Court has wrongly enhanced the market value of the acquired land as there was no evidence to justify the enhanacement of the market value. It was also argued that the land owners are not entitled for interest for the period the possession was taken by the State before publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act, as there is no provision to that effect in the Act. Request for dismissal of appeals filed by the land owners and acceptance of appeals filed by State of Haryana, was made. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. The Ld. Lower Court enhanced the market value of the acquired land on the ground that the rate of agricultural land was having rising trend and in view of the facts of the case, the land owners were entitled for compensation @ ` 22,000/- per acre for chahi and gair mumkin and ` 13,000/- per acre for bhud and banzar, depending upon the nature of the land. The findings of the Trial Court are not based upon any evidence and, therefore, are not sustainable. As such, the same is reversed and it is held that the rates determined by Land Acquistiton Collector do not require any interference. The land of the appellants was acquired for the construction of road, which divided the land of the owners into two parts which makes it difficult to irrigate or use the divided prtions of the land to its optimum. The Ld. Trial Court has not granted any compensation on account of severance. Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, certain R.F.A.. NO. 2399 OF 2002 3 compensation is required to be granted to the land owners on account of severance, which is deterimined @ 20% over and above the market value announced by the Collector along with statutory benefits. In this case, the possession of land was admittedly taken by State on 21.12.1975, whereas the notification unde Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 30.11.1984 and published on 18.12.1984 and the compensation for the period prior to 18.12.1984 was not paid by the Collector however, the learned court below awarded interest for this period which is not in conformity with legal position on the subject. In view of the recent judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Karigowda & Ors. Civil Appeal no. 3838 of 2010 SLP(C) No. 20767 of 2008, decided on 26.04.2010, the land owners are entitled to be compensated for the use and occupation from the date of dispossession till the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. The relevant part of the said judgement is extracted below:- “We are bound by the decision of the larger Bench, which had considered the case of Satinder Singh (supra), on which the reliance has ever been placed by the claimants in the present appeal. The larger Bench after detailed discusssion on the subject, rejected the claim for payment of interest claimed by the respondents in those cases, prior to the date of issuance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act. As is evident from the above dictum of the Court, despite dispossession, the title continues to vest in the land owners and it is open for the land owners to taken action in accordance with law. Once notification under Section 4(1) of the Act has been issued and the acquisition proceedings culminated into an award in terms of Section 11, then alone the land provisions of Section 16 of the Act. The Court, in situations where possessions has been taken prior to issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, can direct the Collector to examine the extent of rent or damage that the owners of land would be entitled to the provisions of Section 48 of the Act would come to aid and the Court would also be justified is issuing appropriate direction. This legal question R.F.A.. NO. 2399 OF 2002 4 is no more open to controversy and stands settled by this Court. We would follow the view taken and accept the contention of the appellant-State that the Reference Court as well as the High Court could not have granted any interest under the provisions of the Act, for a date anterior to the issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act. However, following the dictum of the Bench, we direct the Collector to examine the question of payment of rent/damages to the claimants, from the period when their respective lands were submerged under the back water of the river, till the date of issuance of the Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act, from which date, they would be entitled to the statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation.” In view of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Karidowda case (supra) the appellants are entitled for compensation from the date of their dispossession till the date of Notification under Section 4 of the Act. The land owners shall file application before the Collector concerned to claim damages for their dispossession from the land for the aforesaid period. These applications may be filed upto 31.3.2011 and if such applications are filed then the collector shall consider the same and shall award such amount to the appellants as may be payable in accordance with law. The applications shall be disposed of finally before 30.6.2011 after affording personal hearing to the parties. As discussed above, the appeals are partly allowed. The award of learned lower Court is modified to the extent that the land owners shall be entitled to compensation for their acquired land @ ` 20,500/- per acre for chahi and gair mumkin land and ` 11,400/- per acre for bhud and banzar land. Further, the land owners shall be entitled for compensation on account of their dispossession prior to publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act, in view of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case Special Land Acquisition Officer (supra), for which they have to file application before the Collector concerned as per directions given above. The land owners shall be entitled for compensation on account of severance of their acquired land @ 20% on the market value of their R.F.A.. NO. 2399 OF 2002 5 acquired land. The land owners shall also be entitled for statutory benefits provided for under the Act. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.

13.12.2010 A.Gupta (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE (Refer to Reporter)