Civil Appeal No. 13940 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 28415 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13941 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 29515 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13942 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36111 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13943 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36175 of 2011) and Civil Appeal No. 13944 of 2015 .... Case: Lalaram and Ors. Vs Jaipur Development Authority and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Civil Appeal No. 13940 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 28415 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13941 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 29515 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13942 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36111 of 2011), Civil Appeal No. 13943 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36175 of 2011) and Civil Appeal No. 13944 of 2015 ... |
| Judges | V. Gopala Gowda and Amitava Roy, JJ. |
| Issue | Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 - Sections 4, 6, 9(1), 9(3), 18; Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 - Sections 2(2), 2(5), 54, 54(2), 83, 83(8), 90; Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 - Sections 102A, 103; Preventive Detention Act, 1950; Goa (Prohibition of Further Payment and Recovery of Rebate Benefits) Act, 2002; Airport Authority of ... |
| Judgement Date | December 01, 2015 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
Amitava Roy, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. A procrastinated legal tussle spanning over three decades has spiralled up the judicial tiers to this Court seeking a quietus to the issue of adequate reparation of the Appellants, consequent upon the compulsory acquisition of their lands for the Indian Army for its "Field Firing Range" in the year 1981.
3. The debate centres around the grant of 15% developed residential land in lieu of compensation which, as perceived by the oustees, had been promised by the Urban Development Department of the State Government by its proclaimed policy dated 13.12.2001. The State of Rajasthan (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "the State/State Government") and the Jaipur Development Authority (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "JDA") have taken turf together to successfully laciniate the Appellants' identification of such land, thus impelling them to impeach the impugned judgment and order dated 12.8.2011 rendered by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan upholding the refutation. Since the verdict assailed is common in all the appeals, the instant adjudication would suffice for the analogous disposal thereof.
4. We have heard Dr. Rajeev Dhawan and Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned senior Counsel for the Appellants in Civil Appeals arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos. 28415 of 2011 and 29515 of 2011, Ms. Bina. Madhavan, learned Counsel for the Appellants in Civil Appeals arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 36111 and 36179 of 2011, Mr. Sakal Bhushan, learned Counsel for the Appellants in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36175 of 2012, Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 and Mr. S.S. Shamshery, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 2.
5. Filtering out the unnecessary details, the indispensable facts are that the lands of the Appellants situated at Village Boytawala, District Jaipur was acquired by the State under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "Rajasthan Act") and the Notification Under Section 4 thereof to this effect was issued on 8.5.1981. To reiterate, the land was acquired for the purpose of the Army for its "Field Filing Range". The award under the Rajasthan Act was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 26.3.1983 and the possession of the land was taken over on 26.3.1983. Though the compensation was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer @ Rs. 1500 per bigha, on reference being made under the aforementioned statute, the Reference Court enhanced the same to Rs. 15000/- per bigha by its decision dated 11.4.1994. The determination of market value of the lands made by the Reference Court was unsuccessfully challenged by the Authority and its appeals were dismissed by the High Court on 30.8.2000. The compensation awarded at Rs. 15000/- per bigha, thus attained finality. Compensation, the above notwithstanding, was deposited in the court concerned @ Rs. 1500 per bigha on 11.10.2001. Thus, the amount of compensation deposited was not at the enhanced rate fixed by the Reference Court and affirmed by the High Court.
6. Meanwhile, by circular No. F.6(19)UDH/3/89, Jaipur dated 21.9.1999 issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Urban Development and Housing Department, it was notified by the State Government that it had taken a decision with reference to the earlier circulars, as mentioned therein, that developed land equivalent to 15% of the area required, may be given to the khatedars/land owners in lieu of the land being acquired/held under acquisition/surrendered, as the case may be, in land acquisition cases for commercial purposes. A meeting, thereafter of a High Powered Body under the chairmanship of the Minister of the Department of Urban Development, Rajasthan was held on 18.10.2001 in which it was discussed that in several cases of land acquisition, though award had been passed, the compensation had not been paid to the land owners. It was decided that, in cases where compensation amount awarded had not been paid, though award had been passed, one more opportunity to the khatedars to opt for developed land ought to be afforded and on the basis of the merit of such claims, 15% developed land be allotted to them. The option was made valid till 31.3.2001 and it was resolved that the allotment of land would be made through the allotment committee of the concerned organization. As the minutes of the said meeting would reveal, it was resolved as well that the developed land in lieu of the acquired land would be usually allotted only in the scheme area and at the place where the land acquired was situated and if it was not possible to develop the scheme within the fixed period of five months or if it was not possible to give the land in the same area, only then the land would be allotted in some other area. It was however underlined, that the concerned committee would as far as possible make an endeavour to allot such land to the land losers near the scheme area.
7. The circular No. F6(19)/UDD/89, Jaipur dated 13.12.2001 occupying the centre stage of the debate was thereafter issued by the Under Secretary to the Department of Urban Development with reference to the circular/notification No. F.6(9)/UDH/89 dated 21.9.1999, adverted to hereinabove. The said circular took note of the pendency of land acquisition matters in which, though award had been passed but compensation could not be paid to the land owners. It noted as well, that said land owners in the past could not submit their options within the time prescribed due to lack of information about the provision of allotment of developed land in lieu of cash compensation. The circular recorded the decision of the State, to the effect that in old cases in which award had been passed but compensation could not be made to the khatedars, one more opportunity ought to be granted to them. As a corollary, thereby the khatedars/land owners were left at liberty to exercise their option till 28.2.2002 to be allotted 15% developed land in the scheme area by the allotment committee of the concerned organization, after the approval from the State. The composition of the Committee in the eventualities as mentioned therein was also delineated. The conditions for allotment required, inter alia, that the land to be allotted was to be developed residential land located "normally in the same scheme area and at the very place from where the land had been acquired" and not a commercial land.
8. Admittedly, the Appellants exercised their options and submitted their applications within the time allowed for being allotted 15% developed land in lieu of the compensation payable to them. They did so in writing on 15.1.2002 whereby in the applications addressed to the concerned authority, they recorded their request for 15% developed land in Vidyadhar Nagar Scheme.
9. While the matter rested at that, the JDA on 17.5.2003 issued an auction notice for sale of Group Housing plots in Vidyadhar Nagar Scheme. This was challenged before the Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Development Authority Jaipur (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "the Tribunal") Under Section 83(8)(a) of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (hereinafter, in short to be referred to as "JDA Act"), inter alia, alleging discrimination on the ground that persons similarly situated like the Appellants, had been allotted developed lands in Vidyadhar Nagar Scheme, while they were sought to be deprived by the assailed initiative to auction the land within the said scheme. The Tribunal, by its ruling dated 18.8.2003, annulled the auction notice and held that the JDA would not sell or auction the plots mentioned therein, till the Appellants were allotted 15% developed land in the Vidyadhar Nagar Scheme. The Writ Petition filed by the JDA before the High Court impugning the above decision of the Tribunal was dismissed on 4.1.2005.
10. Subsequent thereto, on 1.7.2005, the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Nagariye Vibhag, addressed a letter to the Commissioner, JDA, Jaipur offering allotment of land in terms of the Circular dated 13.12.2001 to the concerned khatedars/beneficiaries, at Villages Lalchandpura and Anantpura to be allotted through lottery. Being aggrieved by the said decision and also the follow up process in connection therewith, the Appellants approached the Tribunal afresh. By the judgment and order dated 18.10.2005, the Tribunal returned a finding that Appellants were entitled to be allotted 15% developed land in Vidyadhar Nagar Scheme, as plots were available thereat. Thereby the Respondent J.D.A. was directed that the Appellants be allotted developed land at Vidyadhar Nagar in lieu of their acquired land and also restrained it from allotting or selling such land to others. In arriving at this conclusion, as the narration in the decision would reveal, the Tribunal took cognizance of the fact that the land of the Appellants situated in Village Boytawala was acquired for Field Firing Range, in exchange whereof, the Ministry of Defence had handed over to the JDA, land at Vidyadhar Nagar. It also recorded the fact that the JDA had admitted in its reply that the price of the offered land in Lalchandpura and Anantpura Villages was negligible in comparison to that of Vidyadhar Nagar. It, thus held the view, that the proposal for allotment of land at Lalchandpura and Anantpura Villages to the Appellants, by distinguishing them from others to whom 15% developed land in lieu of compensation had been allotted in Vidyadhar Nagar, was inappropriate.
11. Time rolled by without making any endeavour on the part of the JDA, to comply with the determination of the Tribunal. It was, at this juncture, that the JDA, after two years addressed a letter dated 16.10.2007 to the Deputy Secretary (P), Chief Minister Office, Rajasthan Government reciting summarily the above facts. While admitting that out of the khatedars, alike the Appellants, whose land at Boytawala...
To continue reading
Request your trial