Patna High Court - Orders
Divya Deep Singh & Ors vs The Union Of India & Ors on 15 May, 2014
Author: Navaniti Prasad Singh
Bench: Navaniti Prasad Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18918 of 2012
======================================================
1. Divya Deep Singh,
2. Wing Commander (Retd) Kanak Singh,
3. Mayur Singh,
All sons of Late Vishwanath Prasad Singh and residents of Show Boat,
Mauja, Hakimpur, P.O. Dumraon Textiles, P.S. Dumraon, District
Buxar. .... .... Petitioners.
Versus
1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Road, Transport
and Highway, New Delhi.
2. National Highway Authority of India, through its Regional Officer,
at D/63 Sri Krishnapuri, Patna.
3. The Competent Authority-Cum-District Land Acquisition Officer,
Buxar.
4. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary of Revenue and Land
Reforms, Old Secretariat, Patna.
5. The Director, Land Acquisition, Directorate of Land Acquisition,
Ministry of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Collector, Buxar.
7. The District Sub-Registrar, Buxar.
8. The Circle Officer, Dumraon Sub-Division, District Buxar.
.... .... Respondents.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Dr. K.N. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, Adv.
For the National Highway
Authority : Mr. S.N. Pathak, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Krishna Chandra, AC to AG.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
C.A.V. ORDER
13 15-05-2014By this writ petition, the petitioners, who are three brothers and whose substantial lands have been acquired Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 2/27 for widening and converting National Highway No.84, Ara- Buxar section into four lanes, complain about the totally illegal, arbitrary manner and de hors the procedure laid by law in which compensation payable to them in terms of Section-3- G of the National Highways Act, 1956 has been processed and computed. Respondents-National Highways Authority of India have appeared and filed a counter affidavit. Petitioners have filed rejoinder thereto. There is a counter affidavit on behalf of the Competent Authority-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar along with other respondents as well. Having heard the parties at length and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself.
2. It appears that there exists a National Highway No.84 passing through Ara-Buxar and in between, abutting the Highway are the lands of the petitioners at Dumraon within the district of Buxar. Petitioner nos.2 & 3 have a restaurant in the name and style of Fauzi Café popularly known as Fauzi Dhaba on the said land, which is a popular stop for people traveling from Patna to Varanasi via Ara- Buxar-Gajipur. It is not in dispute that those lands of petitioners, upon establishment of the said Café, was assessed to commercial rent by the State since 1995 and commercial Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 3/27 rent receipts as charged by the State for the commercial user of land and paid for 1995 up to 2007 have been annexed with the writ petition which have not been disputed, rather in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Competent Authority- cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar, it is admitted that Café does exist.
3. This National Highway No.84, as per the Central Government policy, was to be broadened into a four lanes National Highway and, accordingly, for the said purpose substantial lands were to be acquired. Accordingly, as envisaged under Section-3-A (1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟), Gazette notification was issued in regard to intention to acquire and there were two notifications in local newspapers as well. In this regard, as contemplated under Section-3-A (3) of the Act, which Gazette notification was published on 10.12.2009, which is Annexure-2 to the writ petition. In the said notification itself it is provided that all objections to the acquisitions, as contemplated under Section-3-C of the Act, would be raised before the District Land Acquisition Officer, who was designated as the Competent Authority in terms of Section-3 (a) of the Act.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-20144/27
4. It appears that in order to obviate any controversies and disputes with regard to nature of land, the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Buxar issued an order on 05.01.2010 constituting a six men committee in pursuance to the directions of the Government of Bihar in the Department of Land Acquisition Directorate, being letter no.1002 dated 10.10.2009, which letter constituting the committee and Government directions are Annexure-3 to the writ petition.
5. The petitioners, on seeing the notification dated 10.12.2009 issued under Section-3-A (1), found that there were certain wrong entries therein and, as such, filed application on 01.02.2010 pointing out that the Gazette notification, apart from making certain wrong declarations with regard to plot numbers, mentioned the lands to be agricultural lands, which was incorrect as they were commercial lands being used commercially. Without deciding objections of the petitioners, declaratory notification as contemplated under Section-3-D (1) was issued in the Gazette of India declaring the lands to be acquired and, consequentially, upon publication of the said notification dated 13.05.2010, the land including petitioners 1.537 hectares of land were acquired and deemed to be vested in the Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 5/27 Government of India. The notification under Section-3-D (1) is Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Petitioners again filed representations annexing therewith certificates granted by the Circle Officer showing that these were commercial lands and were very valuable. They also filed valuation report obtained with regard to valuation of the land from the office of the Sub- Registrar but no heed was paid. Without considering the objections and without hearing the petitioners, a mechanical order (Annexure-12), without any reasons, was passed on 30.07.2012 giving paltry amount of compensation apparently treating the land of the petitioners to be agricultural land by the Competent Authority.
6. It appears that lots of people of the locality were aggrieved by casual, slip-shod and arbitrary manner in which compensation was determined. Some of them approached this Court and in some of the writ petitions the Writ Court directed that parties must be noticed and the matters be re-heard, which order is Annexure-13 to the writ petition. Let it be noted that petitioners had not approached this Court. Again, after this order, "Competent Authority"
without hearing or deciding the issue again passed an order disposing of the purported Land Acquisition Case No.02 of Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 6/27 2012 by order dated 13.08.2012, which is Annexure-14 to the writ petition. By this order, the Competent Authority, in stead of considering the objections and deciding the matter, merely stated that if the petitioners were aggrieved they could either go and file appeal before the six men committee as constituted by the Collector or seek arbitration, which order is Annexure-
14 to the writ petition. Petitioners are seriously prejudiced and aggrieved by this dilatory, arbitrary and illegal manner in which statutory power to decide compensation payable has been exercised.
7. In the counter affidavit filed by the National Highway Authority, it is stated with reference to cases of this Court and the Apex Court that the National Highway Authority is a professionally managed body and acts in public interest. People cannot be permitted to challenge the decision to acquire properties. The further stand is that as per the Cadastral survey and the revisional survey in the revenue records the entries in respect of the lands as was available was that they were agricultural land. The lands were thus rightly designated as agricultural land for the purpose of computing compensation and compensation was rightly paid.
8. In the counter affidavit filed by the Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 7/27 Competent Authority-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar, the stand is not much different. The stand basically is that as per the revenue records based on Cadastral and revisional survey the land had been shown as agricultural land. It was, accordingly, rightly notified as agricultural land in notifications issued under Section-3-A and 3-D of the Act. That was final and could not be changed. It is further stated that as the objection of the petitioners was filed beyond 21 days of the notification, the objection was not required to be considered and was accordingly rejected. It is further noted that the nature of land, having been classified by the Central Government under Section-3-A and 3-D of the Act as agricultural land which were based on the revenue records, could not be changed. In this counter affidavit, it is specifically admitted that Fauzi Café/Dhaba does exist on petitioners‟ land but that part of the land has not been acquired but lands adjacent thereto belonging to the petitioners have been acquired. It is further stand that if petitioners have any grievance with regard to classification of land they should have appealed to the six men committee or moved for arbitration.
9. Dr. K.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel in Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 8/27 support of the writ petition, submits that both the National Highway Authority and the District Land Acquisition Officer, who has been designated as the Competent Authority, have totally misconstrued the statutory provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 leading to gross injustice. He submits that in view of Article-300-A of the Constitution a person can be deprived of his land, which is property, only in accordance with the procedures established by law. This being the constitutional safeguard, the authorities must, both in respect of acquisition and payment of compensation in respect thereof, strictly follow the procedures established by law. He points out that Sections-3-A, 3-B, 3-C, 3-D, 3-E & 3-F relate to acquisition of land and have nothing to do with compensation. It is Sections-3-G & 3-H that deals with compensation. Both these groups of statutory provisions are distinct and separate. His submission would be that first a Gazette notification with two newspapers publication had to be made in terms of Section-3-A with regard to intention to acquire. After hearing the objections against acquisition in terms of Section-3-C of the Act, objections which are required to be filed within 21 days, a declaration is then notified in the official Gazette, as contemplated under Section-3-D of the Act, upon which the Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 9/27 property vests in the Central Government. After this is done, the question of payment of compensation arises, which is done in accordance with Section-3-G of the Act, whereby these proceedings are initiated by the Competent Authority giving notice published in two local newspapers, as contemplated by Section-3-G (3) of the Act, calling upon persons to file their claims and then determine the amount. If the amount is not acceptable to the parties then it is to be determined by the Arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government, which is subject to the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in view of Section-3-G (5) and (6) of the Act. Section- 3-G (7) of the Act, inter alia, provides for considerations to be taken into account by the Competent Authority or the Arbitrator for determining the amount of compensation.
10. Accordingly, submission of the learned Senior Counsel would be that both the National Highway Authority and the Competent Authority misconstrued the scheme totally. Objections as to acquisitions are totally different from objections with regard to calculation of compensation. Petitioners never objected to acquisition. They objected to compensation. Those objections or those proceedings for calculating compensation starts with Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 10/27 newspaper advertisement as required to be made in terms of Section-3-G (3) of the Act. No such newspaper notice was given whatsoever and, if that be so, then the very procedure initiating compensation proceedings was not legally initiated. If that be the position then all subsequent acts were wholly without jurisdiction. Jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for payment of compensation was dependent upon the statutory provision of issuing newspaper notices, which was never done. To ascertain this fact twice by speaking order the writ petition had been adjourned. On the last day, the respondents frankly conceded that no such newspaper advertisement was issued. What was tacit in the admission was that the whole proceedings proceeded as if objections have only to be made once and considered only once in terms of Section-3-C of the Act which had been done and which objection of the petitioners was beyond 21 days and could not be considered. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners points out that this shows the entire fallacy in the manner in which compensation determination proceeding have been taken up. They are totally in conflict with and in total disregard to the statutory procedure made out. He would further submit that mere entries in the revenue records are not absolutely sacrosanct. One has to take Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 11/27 into account changes in user due to passage of time and the factors as existing on the day when acquisition is made. Entries in Cadastral survey or revisional survey are not conclusive because by passage of time the nature of land changes. There being no dispute that the Fauzi Café/Dhaba was established and had been running show that the land was put to commercial user. Merely because some part of the land was vacant would not mean that it was agricultural. He would further submit that the procedure had not been followed for determination of compensation as envisaged as per statute. There was no question of seeking arbitration much less going to six men committee as in law there was no order of the Competent Authority. He would further submit that when the District Magistrate had constituted the six men committee, pursuant to the decision of the State Government, to take photographs and make videos of the site, the Competent Authority had to refer to those materials as well and he could not have shirked his responsibilities only to deprive petitioners of just compensation by ignoring those materials and asking the petitioners to file an appeal before the six men committee, which appeal is not provided by law or go in arbitration.
11. It is these rival contentions that have to be Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 12/27 reconciled. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to take note of the relevant provisions of the Act, which are quoted hereunder:-
3-A. Power to acquire land, etc.- (1) Where the Central Government is satisfied that for a public purpose any land is required for the building, maintenance, management or operation of a national highway or part thereof, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare its intention to acquire such land. (2) Every notification under sub-
section (1) shall give a brief description of the land.
(3) The competent authority shall cause the substance of the notification to be published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language.
3-C. Hearing of objections.-(1) Any person interested in the land may, within twenty-one days from the date of publication of the notification under sub-section (1) of section 3-A, object to the use of the land for the purpose or purposes mentioned in that sub-section.Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 13/27
(2) ........
(3) Any order made by the competent authority under sub-section (2) shall be final.
3-D. Declaration of acquisition.-(1) Where no objection under sub-section (1) of section 3-C has been made to the competent authority within the period specified therein or where the competent authority has disallowed the objection under sub-section (2) of that section, the competent authority shall, as soon as may be, submit a report accordingly to the Central Government and on receipt of such report, the Central Government shall declare, by notification in the Official Gazette, that the land should be acquired for the purpose or purposes mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 3-A. (2) On the publication of the declaration under sub-section (1), the land shall vest absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances.
(3).......
3-G. Determination of amount payable as compensation.- (1) Where Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 14/27 any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order of the competent authority.
(2).........
(3) Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-section (1) of sub-section (2), the competent authority shall give a public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired.
(4) Such notice shall state the particulars of the land and shall require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or by an agent or by a legal practitioner referred to in sub-section (2) of section 3-C, before the competent authority, at a time and place and to state the nature of their respective interest in such land.
(5) If the amount determined by the competent authority under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 15/27 the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government.
(6) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to every arbitration under this Act.
(7)..........
(emphasis supplied)
12. The first thing to be seen from the scheme of the Act aforesaid would be, as rightly submitted by Dr. K.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel, that the scheme is in two parts.
The first part consists of Section-3-A to Section-3-F of the Act, which exclusively deals with acquisition of land and vesting thereof. Section-3-G to 3-I deal with determination of compensation and associated matters. Thus, two parts are to operate independently. The first part, i.e., with regard to acquisition has to be first finished with or dealt with after considering objections as may be raised within 21 days starting with notification in terms of Section-3-A of intention to acquire and calling for objections. Objections have to be dealt with in terms of Section-3-C of the Act, the time for filing thereof is 21 days and then upon adjudication by the competent authority and as a result thereof the Central Government has to Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 16/27 make a declaration of acquisition in terms of Section-3-D of the Act, upon which the lands would vest absolutely in the Central Government. After this procedure is completed then starts the procedure for determining compensation payable, which starts by giving public notice as published in two local newspapers by virtue of Section-3-G (3) and inviting objections and claims. This has then to be adjudicated upon and amount determined by the Competent Authority. Upon such adjudication and the party not being satisfied then on application of the party, it would be determined by an Arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government in terms of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
13. Thus seen, there are two different stages when the Competent Authority adjudicates. First when there are objections as against intention to acquire land then acquisition having been completed, he has to adjudicate with regard to compensation payable. The two adjudications are distinct and separate by time, in procedure and in purpose. These two adjudications are quasi judicial adjudication. I have advisedly and deliberately used the expression "quasi judicial adjudication" as they affect the valuable rights of citizens. First, whether their lands are to be acquired or not and second Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 17/27 having been acquired what is the compensation payable. This necessarily assumes proper consideration of issues raised, which may be of fact or law and have to be disposed of in a quasi judicial manner by speaking orders. They cannot be mechanical. They cannot ignore the issues raised. This is more so if we consider Section-3-I of the Act, which confers upon the Competent Authority all powers of Civil Court while trying suit under Code of Civil Procedure. He is, thus, duty bound not only to see the interest of State but also the interest of citizens who are to be deprived of their property. It is only when the aforesaid procedure, as laid down by statute, is followed that the order of the Competent Authority can be said to be an order in accordance with law and an order in accordance with procedure established by law. The consequences being of drastic implications for the citizens very strict compliance to these procedural safeguards is required on part of the Competent Authority. I can only refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Hukam Chand Shyam Lal Vs. Union of Indian and others, since reported in AIR 1976 Supreme Court 789 and, in particular, in paragraph-18 wherein their Lordships held thus:-
"18. It is well settled that where a Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 18/27 power is required to be exercised by a certain authority in a certain way, it should be exercised in that manner or not at all, and all other modes of performance are necessarily forbidden. It is all the more necessary to observe this rule where power is of a drastic nature ......."
14. Now to the facts of the case. The first objection taken by the National Highway Authority is based on some unreported orders of this Court and some judgments of the Apex Court, which lay down that whether lands had to be acquired for National Highway or not, it is the decision of the Central Government. The National Highway Authority is a professional body and Courts should not interfere in this matter. The proposition is unquestionable but has absolutely no application in the present case. Petitioners have nowhere challenged the acquisition of land. As seen from the scheme as noted above, after notification that was issued under Section-3-A of the Act, they filed their objection only with regard to correction of plot numbers, name of claimants and classification of land as mentioned in the notification. They never even adverted to resist Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 19/27 acquisition. Thus, the line of submission on behalf of National Highway Authority, in this connection, is misconceived.
15. On behalf of National Highway Authority, it is next submitted that the nature of land, having been picked up from the revenue records, could not be challenged and, having been paid compensation, accordingly, no interference is required. If the petitioners are aggrieved, they may seek arbitration.
16. In my view, they appeared to be under a misconception. Adjudication under Section-3-C of the Act is not for the purposes of classification of land as that would be a subject matter relevant when the question of compensation has to be decided. The claim of petitioners cannot be foreclosed in regards compensation at that stage under Section-3-C of the Act. Here, I may also notice the stand of the Competent Authority-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer wherein the stand taken is that the objection of the petitioners was filed beyond 21 days and, as such, could not be considered. A reference to the statute would show that this limitation is provided only under Section-3-C (1) of the Act and has nothing to do with objection in relation to claim of Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 20/27 compensation, which is to be determined under Section-3-G of the Act.
17. It appears that all the authorities, i.e., National Highway Authority and the Competent Authority, were under a wrong impression, contrary to statute, that objections were to be raised once under Section-3-C of the Act and decided once and for all purposes there. The Scheme of the Act, as noted above, is to the contrary. The objection under Section-3-C is totally different and at a different point of time from an objection or claim under Section-3-G of the Act, which is after the land has been acquired and compensation is to be determined. Thus, this itself renders the entire procedure and the consideration for calculating compensation to be in flagrant violation of the statute. The procedure established by law has been given a total gobye.
18. There is yet another fatal lapse. If we refer to Section-3-G (3) it would be apparent that before the Competent Authority proceeds to determine compensation he has to issue notices in two newspapers. It is only thereafter that he proceeds to compute the compensation and it is only thereafter that claims can be filed and/or entertained. The newspaper notices are sine qua non for determination of Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 21/27 compensation. It has a salutary purpose. It not only indicates the process of starting of the process of calculating compensation, it gives a right to the claimant to put forward their claims and demand adjudication as a matter of right for their lands having been acquired, compensation is the only right they are left with. This is very valuable right. As noted above, where law has provided for a procedure then it has to be strictly followed. It cannot be ignored nor new procedure invented which has no authority of law. Thus, when law enshrines of public notice in newspaper for determination of claims of compensation then those publications are foundation for the Competent Authority to proceed in the matter.
19. As noted earlier, this writ petition was adjourned with detailed order directing the respondents to bring on record the said newspaper notices as envisaged under Section-3-G (3) of the Act. As noticed in order dated 08.05.2014, it was conceded that there had been absolutely no newspaper public notice much less as envisaged under Section-3-G (3) of the Act and only some notices were issued and that to pursuant to orders of this Court to enable affected parties to make representations. When the law envisages notice in a particular manner then authorities have no option to Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 22/27 change or ignore that manner and steps taken either in defiance thereof or in ignorance thereof would render actions based or initiated in violation of the statute to be void and unenforceable.
20. Keeping this principle in mind, the facts are eloquent enough to come to a decision. First, authorities take a stand that the objections filed being beyond time, i.e., 21 days after notification and, as such, they were not considered as they were beyond time. This clearly dealt with an objection in terms of Section-3-C of the Act, which is not the case. Then, when again petitioners filed objections they were not pursuant to any newspaper notice as envisaged in law for there was no such notice issued. Thus, it is clear that when it came to determination of compensation, the procedure established by law was not followed. This is directly in contravention of Article-300 A of the Constitution and, thus, the determination cannot be said to be a valid order of Competent Authority against which an arbitral proceeding is required to be taken.
21. Further, as noticed above, this order of the Competent Authority determining compensation is an adjudicatory order as it deals with important constitutional right to receive compensation. Such an adjudicatory order has Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 23/27 to be a speaking order taking into consideration the evidences brought on record. It has to be a speaking order. I regret that the order does not adjudicate upon the issues raised at all. It does not even refer to the issues raised. It is no adjudicatory order.
22. Now, coming to the manner in which the compensation has been determined. The stand of the authority, both National Highway Authority and the Competent Authority, is that the revenue records on basis of which notifications are issued under Sections-3-A & 3-D of that Act are sacrosanct, which is far from truth. The revenue records only reflect the status of land at the time when Cadastral survey or revisional survey was done and not the nature of land, after passage of time, when it is being sought to be acquired. Petitioners had pleaded and it has been accepted in the counter affidavit of the Competent Authority-cum- District Land Acquisition Officer that they had established and were running the "Fauzi Café" also known as "Fauzi Dhaba". They have brought on record that for all most a decade and half prior to notification under Section-3-A of the Act, i.e., from 1994 itself the State was realizing land revenue treating the land as being used for commercial purposes. Those Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 24/27 certificates and tax payment receipts have not been disputed. This march of time cannot be ignored only for the purpose of saving money for the State at the cost of citizens, who are entitled to compensation, which compensation inherently has to be a reasonable compensation. The guiding principles whereof are to be found in Section-3-G (7) of the Act, being the market value of land, on the date of publication of notification under Section-3-A of the Act. Merely stating that the Café was not acquired but the land of petitioners adjoining the Café on the same plot was being acquired, which was vacant and, therefore, agricultural, is wholly wrong. The very existence of commercial establishment in the shape of a Café on the land adjacent and contiguous to the land establishes that the lands are being used for commercial purposes and treating the revenue entries to be sacrosanct, this fact cannot be wished away. When it came to realizing land revenue since 1995 State realized revenue treating the land to be under commercial user but when it came to paying compensation the land usage becomes agricultural notwithstanding the Café being undisputedly being there. This shows the mala fide.
23. If we refer to the order impugned there is absolutely no mention of these facts much less consideration Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 25/27 thereof. The authorities do not dispute that pursuant to the directives of the State Government a committee was formed to look into the nature of user of land. Where was the evidence collected by the committee and where was it considered. To the contrary, the attitude of the Competent Authority was that if petitioners were dissatisfied, they could appeal to the six men committee. Again, something wholly de hors the statute. The committee was to aid in determining the compensation. It was not appellate body and the whole idea was to resolve disputes at an early stage and not prolong, the legal battles so that the matter may be quickly settled and people, who are deprived of their lands, be paid adequate compensation immediately and without long drawn litigations. Unfortunately, the Competent Authority proceeded in total disregard to these facts.
24. Here, I may just quote from the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M/s Hindustan Sugar Mills Vs. The State of Rajasthan and others since reported in AIR 1981 Supreme Court 1681 wherein their Lordships held thus:-
"......We hopefully expect that the Central Government will not try to shirk its legal obligation by resorting Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 26/27 to any legal technicalities. for we maintain that in a democratic society governed by the rule of law, it is the duty of the State to do what is fair and just to the citizen and the State should not seek to defeat the legitimate claim of the citizen by adopting a legalistic attitude but should do what fairness and justice demand."
25. Petitioners have also brought on record various evidences with regard to valuation including certificates from the Sub-Registrar‟s office. None have been even referred to much less considered presumably on the basis of the stand that the revenue records were sacrosanct. If the Cadastral survey or the revisional survey showed the lands to be agricultural then that was the final verdict. Regrettably, that is not the law.
26. Thus, for all the reasons aforesaid, I am unable to uphold that the impugned orders, as contained in Annexures-12 & 14. They cannot be sustained, as being orders of adjudication by the Competent Authority-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar, quantifying the compensation payable in accordance with law and they are thus set aside. The matter is remanded for fresh consideration taking all Patna High Court CWJC No.18918 of 2012 (13) dt.15-05-2014 27/27 materials into account and in accordance with law at earliest preferably within three months from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Competent Authority-cum- District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar in this regard.
27. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) Trivedi/AFR