Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1141 (PAT)

Dheeraj Kumar Singh v. State Of Bihar

2014-11-18

ANJANA MISHRA, I.A.ANSARI

body2014
ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI) Pursuant to the notification, published, on 01.10.1983, under Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the L. A. Act’), possession of the land, which had been acquired, was taken over, on 08.04.1984, by the Collector, Khagaria. Though possession of the land, so acquired, had been taken over by the Collector, payment of compensation to the extent of 80 per cent of the estimated compensation, as is required to be made under Clause (a) of sub-section 3 of Section 17 of the L. A. Act, was not made nor was award, as is required to be made under Section 11 of the L. A. Act, had been made within the prescribed period of two years. 2. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in making payment of the compensation, the appellants herein came to this Court, with a writ petition, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of appropriate directions, which gave rise to CWJC No. 19240 of 2011. By order, dated 31.01.2012, the writ petition was disposed of by a learned single Judge of this Court, the learned single Judge having concluded that the land, in question, had not been vested, in accordance with law, in the State, on two grounds, namely, (i) requisite payment of 80 per cent of the estimated compensation had not been made to the persons interested entitled thereto in terms of the provisions of Clause (a) of sub-section 3 of Section 17 of the L. A. Act and (ii) though Section 11A of the L. A. Act requires that the Collector shall, in terms of Section 11 of the L. A. Act, make an award, with regard to the payment of compensation, within a period of two years from the date of publication of the declaration, no award was made within the said prescribed period and, hence, in terms of Section 11A of the L. A. Act, the land acquisition proceeding stood lapsed inasmuch as Section 11A of the L. A. Act lays down that if no award is made within the said period, the entire proceedings, for acquisition of land, shall lapse. 3. 3. Aggrieved by the disposal of the writ petition in the manner as indicated above, the present appellants have preferred this appeal on the ground that in terms of Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the L. A. Act, the land, in question, stood vested in the State free from all encumbrances, when the Collector, on account of urgency, had, admittedly, taken over the possession of the land for public purpose and, hence, the learned single Judge has fallen in an error in concluding that the acquisition proceeding had lapsed, because no award, in terms of Section 11 read with Section 11A of the L. A. Act, had been made within a period of two years from its commencement. 4. Heard Mr. Ram Suresh Rai, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants, and Mr. P. N. Shahi, Additional Advocate General No. 10, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. What needs to be noted, at the very outset, is that in the light of the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the L.A. Act, whenever the Collector, on the direction of the appropriate Government, takes over, in the case of emergency, possession of any land needed for a public purpose, ‘the land shall stand vested absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances’. 6. In the present case, therefore, when the Collector, pursuant to the notification, dated 01.10.1983, aforementioned, had taken over possession of the land, in question, on 08.04.1984, the land stood, on 08.04.1984, vested absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances, it is only in a case where the possession has not been taken in terms of Section 17 (1) of the L. A. Act that the land shall, under the provisions of Section 16 of the L. A. Act, stand vested absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances, when the Collector makes an award under Section 11 of the L. A. Act meaning thereby that the land stand vested in the Government, when the possession is taken over, for a public purpose, in the case of emergency, whereas, in other cases, the land shall, in the light of the provisions of Section 16 of the L. A. Act, vest in the Government only when an award is made in terms of Section 11 of the L. A. Act. In other words, so long as award is not made, the land sought to be acquisitioned, does not vest in the Government if the possession of the land is not taken over, for a public purpose, in the case of emergency, as provided by Section 17 of the L. A. Act. This position of law is, in fact, not in dispute. 7. What was, therefore, in the present case, required to be done, in the light of provisions of Section 11A of the L.A. Act was to make award in terms of Section 11 of the L.A. Act within the prescribed period of two years as mentioned hereinbefore and make payment of compensation to the persons interested entitled thereto. 8. A perusal of the various orders, passed in this appeal, shows that by order, dated 29.04.2014, the Court directed the State Government to deposit, on or before 2nd June, 2014, a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Thirty Lakhs) only with the Registry of this Court. Following the direction so given, a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Thirty Lakhs) only has been deposited by the Government, on 30.05.2014, in the Registry of this Court. 9. 30,00,000/- (Thirty Lakhs) only with the Registry of this Court. Following the direction so given, a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Thirty Lakhs) only has been deposited by the Government, on 30.05.2014, in the Registry of this Court. 9. When this appeal came up before the Court, on 01.07.2014, it was observed by the Court that the matter, at issue, is the action of the State Government in taking over possession of the lands of the writ petitioners-appellants, situated at village Chakkee Bharkal, Police Station-Gogari, District Khagaria, without following due process of law in the year 1984, but neither the appellants had been paid compensation for the said lands nor had the State Government restored vacant possession of the lands to the appellants; rather, the said lands had been distributed by the State Government amongst as many as 162 landless persons, who came to be settled, on the said lands and have been settlers thereof for nearly 30 years, and, in these circumstances, the State Government was directed, in this appeal, to pay an interim compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- per acre of land, which has been done, but it appears that the original land owners had since died and the amount shall have to be distributed amongst their heirs/successors-in-interest and that the learned counsel for the writ petitioners-appellants submits that the appellants are the heirs of the original owners, but they are not the only heirs and that he would bring further materials on record to indicate the names of the original owners and the extent of their holding and the names of their heirs/successors-in-interest. 10. Thereafter, on 25.07.2014, the Court pointed out that pursuant to the order, dated 29.04.2014, passed in this appeal, the State Government has deposited a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- with the Registry of this Court, but the question is of disbursement of the said sum of Rs.30,00,000/- amongst the land owners or their heirs/successors-in-interest. The Court also pointed out that the amount of compensation, deposited with the Court, cannot be disbursed without proper identification nor can it (Court) rely solely on the affidavit filed by one of the appellants, although each appellant has a separate claim for compensation. 11. The Court also pointed out that the amount of compensation, deposited with the Court, cannot be disbursed without proper identification nor can it (Court) rely solely on the affidavit filed by one of the appellants, although each appellant has a separate claim for compensation. 11. By its order, dated 25.07.2014, the Court, therefore, directed the Collector, Khagaria, to hold an enquiry and submit report who the owners of the land, in question, were, at the time of taking over of possession of the land and the names and the identity of the heirs or legal representatives, who would be entitled to receive compensation in case of the death of the original owner. Under its order, dated 25.07.2014, the Court also directed that the inquiry shall be completed and the report shall be submitted in respect of the extent of land taken over by the State Government, the names of the owners on the date of taking over of the possession of the land and if any of the owners had died, the names and particulars of his heirs and legal representatives, who would be entitled to receive compensation. The Court further directed that the report, so ordered, shall be accompanied by supporting documents and be submitted to the Court latest by 15th September 2014. 12. In compliance of the directions, which were issued, on 25.07.2014, in this appeal, the Collector filed an affidavit, on 17.09.2014, wherein a copy of the order, dated 08.09.2014, passed by the Collector, had been enclosed, which showed that according to the Collector, the present appellants are not the only heirs and successors of the owners of the lands, which stood acquisitioned. 13. Situated thus, we find it appropriate and in the interest of justice to direct the Collector, Khagaria, to start appropriate proceeding for determination of the amount of compensation and also to make payment of the compensation in accordance with law to the persons entitled thereto. We order accordingly. 14. 13. Situated thus, we find it appropriate and in the interest of justice to direct the Collector, Khagaria, to start appropriate proceeding for determination of the amount of compensation and also to make payment of the compensation in accordance with law to the persons entitled thereto. We order accordingly. 14. While determining the compensation, the Collector, Khagaria, shall, however, bear in mind that under Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, if an award is to be made under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, all the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to determination of the compensation, shall be complied with. 15. In terms of the above observations and directions, this appeal shall stand disposed of. 16. No order as to costs.