Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1084 (PAT)

Dharamsheela Devi v. State of Bihar

2014-10-22

SHIVAJI PANDEY

body2014
Shivaji Pandey, J.:–Heard counsel for the petitioners and the respondents. 2. In the present case, petitioners have sought relief for giving direction upon the respondent to pay rest 20 per cent final award amount at the enhanced rate in terms of new scheme of Bihar Land Acquisition, Re-establishment and Rehabilitation scheme, 2007 dated 19th February 2007. 3. A large chunk of land has been acquired on different dates for National Thermal Power Corporation for the establishment of Power Generating Unit, including the land of petitioners. The description of land is as follows: Award Khata Plot No. Area(A/D) No. No. 146 229 2836 0.6400 50 (Ka) 173 2740 0.5700 50(Kha) 76 2750 0.5700 4. In the present case for the acquisition of the land Notification was issued under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(4) of the Act, invoking the emergency provision on 1st June 2006. Notice for declaration under Section 6 was issued on 6th June 2006 and after that a notice under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 23rd October 2006. After enquiry, the Collector vide order dated 19.01.2007 arrived to a conclusion about the rate of the land Rs.2.65 lacs per acre. Thereafter awards were prepared and petitioners were given notice on 22nd January 2007 (Annxure-2) to receive 80 per cent award on 29th January 2007. Accordingly, possession of the land was handed over to NTPC. 5. While the matter was pending, the Government of Bihar notified a new scheme as Bihar Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2007 which came into effect on 19th February 2007. 6. After receipt of the notice as aforesaid, petitionderno.1 submitted her application and received the amount on 8th June 2007, petitioner no.2 submitted his application on 26th June 2007, received the amount. On 14th June 2010 the Government sanctioned Rs.5,95,56,237/- for payment of rest 20 per cent compensation amount. 7. Accordingly, petitioners were issued notice dated 20/7/2010 to receive rest amount of compensation. Petitioners have claimed that award has been prepared on 20th July 2010 i.e. after the enforcement of new scheme and as such petitioners are entitled to rest amount of award at enhanced rate in terms of liberalized new scheme of the State of Bihar . 7. Accordingly, petitioners were issued notice dated 20/7/2010 to receive rest amount of compensation. Petitioners have claimed that award has been prepared on 20th July 2010 i.e. after the enforcement of new scheme and as such petitioners are entitled to rest amount of award at enhanced rate in terms of liberalized new scheme of the State of Bihar . Annexure-V, Va and Vb show that the date of award is 20th July 2010 and it cannot relate back to earlier date and, as such, petitioners are entitled to get the compensation in terms of the new scheme. 8. Counsel for the State has produced the original register maintaining awards, has different columns, such as nature of land, rate of land, date of preparation of award, date of payment of compensation. As it has been prepared in course of business and as such it has evidentiary value under Evidence Act. On the strength of this Register, counsel for the State has submitted before this Court that hundred per cent award has been prepared on 22nd January 2007 which contains the names of parties, area of the land, nature of the land, rate of the land, interest as well as Solacium amount etc. It is also submitted that all the three ingredients i.e. 1st the area of the land, the compensation and apportionment of the said amount are present. The Government of Bihar enforced the new scheme on 19th February 2007, before the award has been prepared. 9. Counsel for the State has drawn my attention to clause 5 of new scheme where it has been mentioned that the new scheme will be applicable where award has not been prepared and has submitted that in the present case, the award has been prepared before the cut-off date apparent from Annexure-II series dated 22/01/2007 shows that the notices were issued to the petitioners to receive the amount on 29th January 2007 but on that date petitioners did not appear but later on they appeared and received the amount without any demur so much so the possession of the land was handed over to NTPC before the commencement of the new scheme. In this view of the matter, petitioners are not entitled to the benefit in terms of the new scheme. 10. In this view of the matter, petitioners are not entitled to the benefit in terms of the new scheme. 10. Having considered the rival contention of the parties, in Para-1 the relief sought is only limited to payment of compensation at the enhanced rate with respect to rest 20 per cent amount of award. 11. Originally grievance was made for payment of amount of compensation at enhanced rate but it has been confined to only rest 20 per cent amount of award. The new scheme has been enforced on 19th February 2007 where clause in 5 of scheme shows, beneficiary will be those class of land holders where award has not been prepared before due date. 12. From the original record it appears that the Land Acquisition Officer in terms of Section 11 of the Act has prepared the award on 20th January 2007 and it contains all the ingredients required for the preparation of award, as the record shows name of the land holder, nature of the land, area of the land and value of the land have been mentioned, including the interest and solacium. It also shows that the award amount at 100 per cent has also been mentioned in Col.22 whereas Col. 25 shows the amount of 80 per cent award amount to the tune of Rs.1,80,888.58. The Collector under the Act issued dated 22nd January 2007 asked parties to receive the amount on 29th January 2007. The possession of the land was also handed over to NTPC on 31st January 2007 i.e. before the cut-off date. 13. On analysis of aforesaid facts, it is clear that the new scheme has been enforced on 19th January 2007. Merely because the petitioners have been asked to receive rest 20 per cent award amount, at the subsequent date that will not give cause to petitioners to claim rest 20% award amount at enhanced rate when the register produced before this Court shows that the award has been prepared on 20th January 2007. This Court is of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to the benefits claimed as per the new scheme. 14. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. ?