Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 2161 (PNJ)

Ram Karan v. Tribunal, Improvement Trust

2008-12-19

SURYA KANT

body2008
Judgment Surya Kant, J. 1. This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 2815, 4472, 4473 of 1987, 6180 and 6181 of 1989 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. For brevity, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 2815 of 1987. 2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the awards dated 11th February, 1987 [Annexures P-3 and P-41 passed by the Improvement Trust Tribunal, Ambala whereby the acquired land has been divided into three blocks "A", "B" and "C" and compensation @ Rs. 15/-, 12/- and 10/- per square yard has been fixed for each block respectively, besides holding the petitioner-claimants entitled to solatium @30% and interest @9% for the first year and @ 15% per annum till the actual payment of compensation amount. 3. The petitioner was owner of land measuring 13 kanals 4 marlas comprised in Khasra Nos. 30, 31, 32, 33 and 35 situated in village Jhandli, Tehsil & District Ambala. The said land was decided to be acquired by the State Government for the Improvement Trust, Ambala City for the Improvement Trust Scheme No. 19 sanctioned on 30th March, 1971 along with other adjoining land of village Jhandli, total measuring 158 kanals 4 marlas [19.90 acres]. Notification under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 was published on 22nd October, 1974, followed by the notification under Section 42 of the Act published on 20th April, 1976. The Land Acquisition Collector gave his award on 18th April, 1978 dividing the entire land into three blocks and granted compensation fo? Block "A" @ Rs. 16,500/- per acre, [Rs. 3.41 per sq. yard], Block "B" @ Rs. 16,000/- per acre [Rs. 3.31 per square yard] and Block "C" @ Rs. 15,500/- per acre [Rs. 3.20 per square yard]. 4. It requires mention here that the acquired land was situated within the municipal limits of Ambala City and was abutting the Old Delhi Road and was surrounded by Company Bagh Colony, Model Town and Kanshi Nagar Residential localities on the opposite; and Kartar Singh Nagar Colony on its Eastern side. The New Model Town colony and Prem Nagar were on the Western side of the acquired land, which was also in close proximity of the Sessions Court. On its back side, there is a railway line going to Delhi. 5. The New Model Town colony and Prem Nagar were on the Western side of the acquired land, which was also in close proximity of the Sessions Court. On its back side, there is a railway line going to Delhi. 5. Being dis-satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, the petitioner and other land-owners sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 claiming compensation @ Rs. 250/- per square yard. 6. The Tribunal has decided the reference vide the impugned common award dated 11th February, 1987 whereby division of the land in three blocks made by the Land Acquisition Collector has been upheld but the compensation has been enhanced to Rs. 15/- per square yard for Block "A", Rs. 12/- per square yard for Block "B" and Rs. 10/- per square yard for Block "C". In additibn,the Tribunal has also held the petitioner and other landowners entitled to solatium @ 30% and interest @9% for the first year and thereafter @,15% per annum till the actual payment. 7. Still dis-satisfied, the petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 8. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard at some length. The records including the site plan etc. have been perused. 9. The petitioners have raised two fold contentions for enhancement of the compensation. Firstly, it is urged that the Tribunal has based its awards on another award of the even date rendered in the Land Acquisition Case of. P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambala City wherein the land was acquired on 23" April, 1965 and the compensation @ Rs. 20/- and Rs. 15/- per square yard has been awarded by adopting belting system. On the contrary, in the case of the petitioner, the land was acquired on 22"d October, 1974, i.e., after more than nine years and yet compensation has been awarded at a lower rate though both the lands are of equal potentiality. The second contention is emanating from the reliance placed upon the award [Ex.P8] pertaining to the acquisition of land for HUDA/Housing Board made on 30th January, 1973. There the compensation was awarded @ Rs. 70/- per square yard for the levelled land and Rs. 50/- per square yard for the low-lying land. The petitioner also urges that the sale deeds dated 6th June, 1971 [Ex.P5], 6th June, 1971 [Ex. There the compensation was awarded @ Rs. 70/- per square yard for the levelled land and Rs. 50/- per square yard for the low-lying land. The petitioner also urges that the sale deeds dated 6th June, 1971 [Ex.P5], 6th June, 1971 [Ex. PW7/1 ], 27th March, 1972 [Ex.Pl ], 28th December, 1976 [Ex.P6] and the Conveyance Deed dated 14th January, 1975 [Ex.P2] have been erroneously over-looked btie Tribunal and that the acquired land ought not to have been divided into three blocks as the acquired land, as a compact piece, has been found fit for use, both commercial and residential purposes. 10. Learned counsel for the Improvement Trust, on the other hand, contended that the compensation determined by the Tribunal is just and fair, warranting no interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. Relying upon the observations made by the Tribunal that a part of the land is low lying area where the Municipality used to dump its garbage, he maintained that the division of land into three blocks by the Tribunal is fully justified on facts. It was argued that the petitioners have rightly not been granted compensation at par with P.K.R.Jain Girls High School, Ambala city for the reason that the land of the School was located in the heart of the City and had the potentiality to be used exclusively for commercial purposes. Learned counsel, however, did not dispute the fact that against the Tribunals award dated 11th February, 1987 in the case of P.K.R.Jain Girls High School, Ambala City,CWP No. 5073 of 1987 was allowed in part by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment dated 13th December, 2006, enhancing the compensation @ 30/- per square yard besides solatium @ 30% and interest @9% from the date of award for the first year and @ 15% per annum thereafter. A review petition filed by the Improvement Trust, Ambala City has also been dismissed vide the order dated 17th August, 2007. 11. The scope of interference by a writ Court in the orders passed by judicial or quasi-judicial Tribunals has been re-stated time and again. It is well known that a writ Court can not act as an appellate Court to re-appraise and re-examine the relevant facts and circumstances or the evidence led before the Tribunal to arrive at a different finding. The scope of interference by a writ Court in the orders passed by judicial or quasi-judicial Tribunals has been re-stated time and again. It is well known that a writ Court can not act as an appellate Court to re-appraise and re-examine the relevant facts and circumstances or the evidence led before the Tribunal to arrive at a different finding. The power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is extra ordinary in nature to be exercised sparingly in appropriate cases. There can, however, be no rigid formula or cast iron fetters to determine the exercise of writ jurisdiction as the same would vary from case to case. Where it is proved that the Tribunal has returned a finding in complete disregard to the admitted evidence on record, or it has mis-read the same, the correctional step by the High Court would fall within the ambit of its writ jurisdiction. Similarly, wherever the High Court finds that there is mis-application of law or the settled legal principles have either been overlooked or mis-construed, it would be a fit case to invoke jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution to wipe out the consequences of the Tribunals illegality. 12. Considering the present case within the above noticed para-meters, it may be mentioned here that the Tribunal has returned the following findings of fact regarding the location of the acquired land and its surroundings :- "Though, oral evidence has been led by both the sides and efforts have been made to prove on behalf of the claimants that acquired land, was agricultural at the time of acquisition yet it had great potential of being used both for residential and commercial purposes. In view of the situation depicted above, it can not be denied that the acquired land was fit to be used both for commercial ndd residential purposes and these facts have, therefore, to be kept in consideration in assessing the market value". 13. Similarly, while comparing the acquired land, viz, the sale transactions being relied upon by the petitioners, the Tribunal has held as follows : ".....This land besides mostly being away from the road running between Ambala City and Ambala Cantt had another disadvantage. It is admitted by several witnesses of the claimants that the municipal Committee was dumping their garbages on this land. Dirty water was also passing from this land. It is admitted by several witnesses of the claimants that the municipal Committee was dumping their garbages on this land. Dirty water was also passing from this land. So, it is a case where the land was lying waste and unused for few years. It is also in evidence that the land which is close to the railway line was having pits. So, the market value of such land can not be fixed by taking into consideration the land where the building activity is going on......" 14. There are two material instances on record which have a direct bearing to determine the fair and just market value of the acquired land at the relevant time. The first instance is the Tribunals own award of even date in the case of P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambala City which is abutting Hisar-Ambala road [now a National Highway] and is in the heart of the City. The aforesaid land is surrounded by a Green Belt followed by the Ambala Cantt. Road [Old Delhi Road] where the acquired land is located. The land of P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambala City is located at the T-junction where Hisar - Ambala Road and Ambala City - Ambala Cantt [Old Delhi Road] hits each other. In terms of location and consequential potentiality, the land of P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambla City, therefore, is much superior than the acquired land. The Tribunal has held on facts that a part of the acquired land towards the railway line is a low lying area which was being used by the Municipality to dump its garbage. No such disadvantage has been found by the Tribunal in respect of the land of P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambala City. City - Ambala @ Rs. 30/- per square yard awarded by this Court for the land of P.K.R. Jain Girls High School, Ambala City could not have been awarded for the acquired land, had it been also acquired in the year 1965. In my considered view, taking into consideration all the advantages and disadvantages, the acquired land could fetch maximum rate of Rs. 15 to 20/- per square yard in the year 1965. Applying the principle of progressive rise in price @10% per annum, the fair and just market value of the year 1974, could be Rs. 20x10% per annum x [Rs. 20+181-] per square yard. 15. 15 to 20/- per square yard in the year 1965. Applying the principle of progressive rise in price @10% per annum, the fair and just market value of the year 1974, could be Rs. 20x10% per annum x [Rs. 20+181-] per square yard. 15. Adverting to the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners that the acquired land ought not to have been divided into three blocks, I am of the considered view that the principle of belting is a well known/recognized method to determine the just and adequate compensation lest unjust award would ensue. When it is proved that the acquired land is comprising levelled as well as low lying area, it would be unjust and unfair to treat both the pieces of land equally for determining the market value. In a case where the acquired land is a big chunk of land and the evidence on record does suggest variation of advantages and disadvantages of different pieces of such acquired land, the Court would be justified in adopting the belting system. 16. Following these principles and having regard to the evidence on record and the finding of fact returned by the Tribunal that a part of the acquired land towards the railway line is a low lying area which was being used by the Municipality to dump its garbage, I am of the considered view that the division of the acquired land by the Tribunal into three blocks "A , "B" and "C" is fully justified and no interference in the said finding of fact is called for. 17. For the reasons afore-stated, these writ petitions are allowed in part. While the landowners whose lands fall in Block Pt are held entitled to compensation @ Rs. 38/- per square yard, those whose land falls in Block "B" are held entitled to compensation @ Rs. 34/- whereas those landowners whose lands fall in block "C" are held entitled to compensation @ Rs. 28.50/- per square yard. The petitioners shall also be entitled to solatium @ 30% besides interest @9% from the date of award till one year and @ 15% per annum till actual payment thereof. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.