Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nand Ram And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 14 September, 2010
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006 (O&M)
Date of decision: September 14, 2010
Nand Ram and others
... Appellants
vs.
State of Haryana and others
... Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Shailendra Jain, Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Mr. M. K. Mittal,
and Mr. Sanjay Vashisht, Advocates
for the land owners.
Mr. H. S. Hooda, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for HSIIDC
Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
1. This order will dispose of the following appeals:
R.F.A. Nos. 3541 and 3542 of 2006;
R.F.A. Nos. 2983, 3179 to 3192, 3194, 3195, 3206 to 3209, 3212,
3237 to 3256, 3257, 3259, 3260, 3464, 3494, 3495, 3504, 3554 to
3557, 3959, 3960, 3962 to 3969, 3996 to 4032, 4071 to 4077, 4115
to 4123, 4134, 4180 to 4185, 4225 to 4242, 4442 to 4492, 4618,
4936 to 4943, 4992, 4993, 5123, 5577 and 5581 of 2009;
R.F.A. Nos. 400 to 405, 552 TO 555 OF 2010 and
Cross Objections Nos. 24-CI to 27-CI, 29-CI, 32-CI to 35-CI, 41-CI,
47-CI to 51-CI, 57-CI, 68-CI, 76-CI, 140-CI, 142-CI, 147-CI, 149-
CI, 154-CI, 159-CI and 160-CI of 2010,
as common questions of law and facts are involved.
2. In the appeals and cross-objections filed by the land owners, the
prayer is for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned court below for
the acquired land.
3. In the appeals filed by Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure
Development Corporation Ltd. (for short, `the Corporation'), the prayer is for
reduction in the compensation awarded to the land owners for the acquired land.
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [2]
4. The acquisition of compact block of land in the present set of appeals
is pertaining to six villages, namely Chirhara, Suthani, Jalalpur, Suthana, Asalwas
and Jaliawas, Tehsil Bawal in District Rewari.
FACTS
Acquisition regarding village Chirhara
5. Vide notification dated 11.12.1995, issued under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Haryana acquired 249
kanals and 4 marlas of land in village Chirhara, Tehsil Bawal, District Rewari for
development as Industrial Growth Centre at Bawal. The same was followed by
notification dated 24.1.1996, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land
Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed compensation @ `
1,43,000/- per acre for Chahi and Gair Mumkin land; ` 1,15,000/- per acre for
Barani land; ` 1,65,000/- per acre for land upto the depth of two acres of the road
and ` 6,00,000/- per acre upto the depth of two acres on National Highway No. 8.
Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On
reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market
value of the acquired land @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre upto the depth of 500 yards on
both sides of National Highway No. 8 as well as State Highway (Rewari-Bawal
road) and ` 4,00,000/- per acre for the remaining land.
Acquisition regarding village Jaliawas
6. Vide same notification, issued under Section 4 of the Act, land
measuring 503 kanals and 2 marlas in village Jaliawas, Tehsil Bawal, District
Rewari was acquired for the same purpose. The same was followed by notification
dated 24.1.1996, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Collector assessed
compensation @ ` 1,10,000/- per acre for chahi land; ` 94,000/- per acre for
barani land; ` 1,43,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land; ` 1,54,000/- per acre
upto the depth of two acres on both sides of the road and ` 6,00,000/- per acre
upto the depth of two acres on both sides of National Highway No. 8. Dissatisfied
with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference
under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of
the acquired land @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre for the land falling upto the depth of
500 meters on National Highway No. 8 and 71 and ` 4,00,000/- per acre for the
remaining land.
Acquisition regarding village Suthani
7. Vide same notification, issued under Section 4 of the Act, land
measuring 104 kanals and 4 marlas in village Suthani, Tehsil Bawal, District
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [3]
Rewari was acquired for the same purpose. The same was followed by
notification dated 24.1.1996, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Collector
assessed compensation @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi land; ` 94,000/- per acre
for Barani land; ` 1,50,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land and ` 1,54,000/- per
acre upto the depth of two acres near the road. Dissatisfied with the award of the
Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the
Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ `
3,50,000/- per acre.
Acquisition regarding villages Asalwas and Suthana
8. Vide same notification, issued under Section 4 of the Act, the land
in villages Aswalwas and Suthana, Tehsil Bawal, District Rewari was acquired
for the same purpose. The same was followed by notification dated 24.1.1996,
issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Collector assessed the market value of the
acquired land in the aforesaid villages as under:
"Village Amount awarded per acre
in `
.................................................................................................................................
Asalwas 1,25,000/- per acre for chahi land;
6,00,000/- per acre upto the depth of two acres on both sides of National Highway No. 8.
Suthana 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi land;
72,000/- per acre for Banjar land;
1,54,000/- per acre upto the depth of two acres of the road;
6,00,000/- per acre upto the depth of two acres on the Highway.
Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre upto the depth of 500 yards on both sides of National Highway No. 8 and State Highway No. 71 (Rewari Bawal road) and ` 4,00,000/- per acre for the remaining land.
Acquisition regarding village Jalalpur
9. Vide same notification issued under Section 4 of the Act, land measuring 116 kanals and 14 marlas in village Jalalpur, Tehsil Bawal, District Rewari was acquired for the same purpose. The same was followed by notification dated 24.1.1996, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Collector assessed compensation @ ` 1,10,000/- per acre for chahi land and ` 1,43,000/- per acre for R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [4] Gair Mumkin land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 3,00,000/- per acre.
10. The land owners as well as the Corporation preferred appeals against the award of the learned court below. This Court vide detailed judgment in R.F.A. No. 703 of 2003 -Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation and others v. Mehar Chand and others, decided on 6.9.2006 remanded the matters back with a direction to the learned court below for fresh determination of market value of the acquired land on the basis of evidence already led by the parties. On remand, the learned court below, vide different awards, assessed the market value of the acquired land for different villages at different rates, the details of which are as under:
...................................................................................................................................
Name of the village Amount awarded per acre
in `
..............................................................................................................................
Chirhara 8,00,000/- per acre upto 500 yards on
National Highway No. 8 and Rewari-
Bawal road.
4,00,000/- per acre for remaining land.
Suthani 4,00,000/- per acre for all types of land.
Jaliawas 8,00,000/- per acre upto 500 yards on
National Highway No. 8 and Rewari-
Bawal road.
Suthana and Asalwals 8,00,000/- per acre upto 500 yards on
National Highway No. 8 and Rewari-
Bawal road.
6,00,000/- per acre
Jalalpur 4,00,000/- per acre for all types of land."
Arguments
11. Learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that acquisition of large chunk of land was carried out pertaining to six villages. Prior to this, vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 10/12.9.1992 (hereinafter referred to as ` the 1992 acquisition') land pertaining to nine villages was acquired, which included present six villages as well. He submitted that the sale deeds, which were produced by the land owners in evidence, were pertaining to small pieces of land. Even if those were to be relied upon considering the fact that the land pertaining thereto formed part of the acquired land, a reasonable cut was required to be applied. In the alternative, it was submitted that this court vide R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [5] judgment dated 23.8.2010 in R.F.A. No. 3323 of 2005 -Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation and another v. Gindori and others, has already assessed the value of the acquired land pertaining to the 1992 acquisition. As there was a time gap of three years and three months, the land owners, at the best, should be granted increase @ 12% per annum thereon.
12. On the other hand, learned counsel for the land owners submitted that sale deeds (Ex. P3 to Ex. P5) pertained to the acquired land. In terms of settled position of law, the same are best pieces of evidence. No cut was required to be applied, as is sought to be argued by learned counsel for the Corporation for the reason that more than 3 years prior to the acquisition in the present case, large chunk of area was acquired for development as industrial estate and with development activities, when infrastructural facilities were being provided, the prices of land in the area shoot up. Even otherwise, the acquisition in the present case was pertaining to small pockets of land which were left out of the earlier acquisition. These pockets are located at different places and some of them are even located within the outer boundary of the land acquired in the year 1992. In fact, considering the acquisition of large chunk of land in the area and also the fact that small portions within the outer boundary of the acquired land were left out at that time for the reasons best known to the State, the buying and selling activity in the area was restricted and the transactions were in the kind of distress sale. It was also for the reason that some of the persons, whose land had been acquired, filed C.W.P. No. 6211 of 1994--Bhoop Singh v. The State of Haryana and others in this court challenging the acquisition in the area inter alia on the ground of discrimination. On account of that fact, the land owners, whose land had not been acquired in the first round, had their fingers crossed as the status of their land was not very clear. In fact, real value of the land in the area is evident from the fact that the Collector himself for the land abutting National Highway No. 8 had enhanced the compensation thereof from ` 2,00,000/- to ` 6,00,000/- per acre. In fact, this was the kind of appreciation of prices in the area. The land owners should be granted compensation for the entire chunk of land, irrespective of its quality by granting increase in the same proportion, even if the judgment of this Court in Gindori's case (supra) is considered.
13. The aforesaid argument was sought to be buttressed while referring to subsequent acquisition of small portion of 16 kanals and 12 marlas of land pertaining to village Jaliawas, which was acquired vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 24.5.1996, where the Collector himself awarded compensation for the land abutting National Highway No. 8 at ` 9,00,000/- per R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [6] acre and for chahi kind of land @ ` 3,00,000/- per acre. It was increase of 50% for chahi kind of land from the acquisition in question, where notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued merely six months prior thereto on 11.12.1995. As far as land on National Highway No. 8 is concerned, the increase was to the tune of 173%. The aforesaid facts show the fast pace at which the value of the land in the area was increasing considering its potentiality.
14. In view of the contentions of learned counsel for the landowners, learned counsel for the Corporation was asked to explain as to on what basis the award of the Collector was announced for the acquisition in question, where there was increase in the value of land abutting National Highway No. 8 to the tune of 200% and for the land located on Rewari-Bawal road, it ranged from 2.67% to 32%. There was large variation even in the increase pertaining to other qualities of land of different villages. Further, the award pertaining to acquisition of land vide notification dated 24.5.1996 pertaining to the land of village Jaliawas was also confronted, where the increase within the period of six months, as compared to the acquisition in question, was 50% as far as land on National Highway No. 8 is concerned and for chahi kind of land, the same was 173%. Mr. Hooda, learned senior counsel, while categorically stating that he does have any justification for the award of the Collector as far as the land pertaining to the acquisition in question is concerned. However, the submission was that the value of land is required to be determined on the basis of evidence led by the parties. The award of the Collector should not be considered as such. As regards acquisition vide notification dated 24.5.1996 is concerned, the submission was that the award pertaining thereto is not part of the record, however, the correctness thereof was not doubted, where substantial increase was granted in the value of land within a period of six months.
15. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record.
Discussions
16. The undisputed facts on record are that a large chunk of land measuring 8,789 kanals and 11 marlas pertaining to nine villages was acquired by the State vide notification dated 10/12.9.1992. A perusal of the site plan produced by learned counsel for the Corporation in court at the time of hearing shows that small pockets of land evidently ranging even from a few marlas and going upto a few acres was acquired subsequently vide notification dated 11.12.1995 issued under Section 4 of the Act. Otherwise, the acquisition of land was carried out in September, 1992. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid portion of land was either R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [7] not acquired earlier or released from acquisition for the reasons best known to the authorities. Some of the land owners challenged the acquisition inter-alia on the ground of discrimination. However, this Court in C.W.P. No. 6211 of 1994 -
Bhoop Singh v. The State of Haryana and others, decided on 29.5.1995, while not finding merit in the submissions made by learned counsel for the land owners for quashing the notification of acquisition carried out in the year 1992, directed that left over or released land be acquired immediately. The relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is extracted below:
"In view of the above, we do not find any substance in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed subject to the direction that the respondents should immediately initiate action for acquisition/re-acquisition of the lands exempted from acquisition/ released from acquisition by taking proceedings under the Act. The appropriate steps should be taken by the respondents within five months and a report should be submitted to this court by December 12, 1995 on which date the case shall be listed before this Court."
17. It was only thereafter that pockets of land left out in the earlier acquisition, for which apparently there is no explanation available, was notified for acquisition.
18. In the scheme of the Act, the Collector has been assigned very important role in the process of acquisition of land. Beginning from Section 4 of the Act, where the preliminary notification is issued regarding acquisition of land. After the same is published in the official gazette, the Collector has been assigned the duty to cause public notice of the substance of such notification to be given at convenient places in the locality. Under Section 5A of the Act, any person interested in any land which has been notified under Section 4 of the Act, has been given right to file objections to the acquisition. These objections are to be made to the Collector in writing and the Collector is required to afford personal hearing to the person who has filed objections or his pleader. After hearing such objections, the Collector is required to make such further enquiry, if necessary, and make a report regarding the same to the appropriate government containing his recommendations on the objections for decision. After consideration of the report, a notification under Section 6 of the Act is issued and the Collector is again required to perform the duty assigned to him regarding publication of its notice in the area where the land is situated. Section 7 of the Act provides that whenever any land has been declared to be needed for a public purpose, the appropriate government or such other authorised officer shall direct the Collector to take order R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [8] for acquisition of the land. Section 8 of the Act assigns the duty on the Collector to mark the acquired land, get the same measured and a site plan prepared.
19. Under Section 9 of the Act, another important function assigned to the Collector is that a public notice is required to be given at convenient places stating that the government intends to take possession of the land and the land owners are asked to submit their claims for compensation for the interests in land. The persons interested in the land are required to appear personally or through an agent before the Collector for the purpose. The Collector is also required to serve notice on the occupiers of the land.
20. As far as valuation of the land is concerned, Section 11 of the Act is most important. It provides that the Collector is required to consider objections regarding the measurement and value of the land on the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act. After considering the respective claims of the parties, he is required to make an award regarding --- (i) the true area of the land; (ii) the compensation which in his opinion should be allowed for the land and (iii) the apportionment of said compensation among all the persons known or believed to be interested in the land.
Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 provides that no award shall be made by the Collector under this sub-section without the previous approval of the appropriate government or such other officer authorised in this behalf.
21. Under Section 12 of the Act, the award of the Collector is considered to be final and conclusive evidence, as between the Collector and the persons interested, regarding true area, value of the land and apportionment of compensation among the persons interested. Notice of the award is required to be given to the persons interested, who were not present before the Collector in person or through attorney. Section 15 of the Act provides that in the matter of determination of compensation, the Collector is to be guided by the provisions contained in Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. The appropriate government has the right to call for the record of the Collector to satisfy itself as regards its legality or propriety before announcement of award by the Collector under Section 11 of the Act.
22. Where a person interested in the acquired land has not accepted the award, he may by written application to the Collector require that the matter may be referred by the Collector for determination of fair value of the land to the court. While making reference to the Court, the Collector is required to provide certain specific information in writing in terms of Section 19 of the Act. Sections 23 and R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [9] 24 of the Act provide for certain para-meters/factors to be considered and neglected for the purpose of determination of fair value of the land, may be by the Collector or the Court. It would be appropriate to extract the same as under:
"Matters to be considered in determining compensation.- (1) In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Act, the court shall take into consideration - first, the market value of the land at the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1);
secondly, the damage sustained by the person interested, by reason of the taking of any standing crops or trees which may be on the land at the time of the Collector's taking possession thereof;
thirdly, the damage (if any), sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land, by reason of severing such land from his other land;
fourthly, the damage (if any), sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other property, moveable or immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings;
fifthly, If, in consequence of the acquisition of the land by the Collector, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses (if any) incidental to such change; and sixthly, the damage (if any) bona fide resulting from diminution of the profits of the land between the time of the publication of the declaration under Section 6 and the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land.
(1A) In addition to the market value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1), in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.
Explanation.-- In computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [10] acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall be excluded. (2) In addition to the market-value of the land as above provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of thirty per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition.
24. Matters to be neglected in determining compensation.-- But the Court shall not take into consideration --
first, the degree of urgency which has led to the acquisition; secondly, any disinclination of the person interested to part with the land acquired;
thirdly, any damage sustained by him which, if caused by a private person, would not render such person liable to a suit;
fourthly, any damage which is likely to be caused to the land acquired, after the date of the publication of the declaration under section 6, by or in consequence of the use to which it will be put;
fifthly, any increase to the value of the land acquired likely to accrue from the use to which it will be put when acquired; sixthly, any increase to the value of the other land of the person interested likely to accrue from the use to which the land acquired will be put;
seventhly, any outlay or improvements on, or disposal of the land acquired, commenced, made or effected without the sanction of the Collector after the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) or; eighthly, any increase to the value of the land on account of its being put to any use which is forbidden bylaw or opposed to public policy."
23. In terms of the provisions of Section 25 of the Act, the award of the Collector is final and the amount of compensation determined therein cannot be reduced by the court. Even in the succeeding sections of the Act also, certain other important duties have been assigned to the Collector, which are not being referred to, for the reason that the same are not related with the valuation of the land as such.
24. A perusal of the multifarious important duties assigned to the R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [11] Collector under the Act clearly show that he is one of the most important functionary in the process of acquisition of land. The fact cannot be denied that by proceeding under the Act, the land is compulsorily acquired, depriving the owner thereof of his rights in the land, however, entitling him appropriate compensation therefor, which is to be determined by the Collector on the basis of material produced by the land owners and after such other enquiry, as he may deem fit. The courts proceed with the assumption that any government official, who has been assigned any duty under any statute, performs the same diligently and within the frame work of law, unless otherwise proved. Though there have been many instances of misuse of power as well, but those who indulge in such practice are required to be taken care of appropriately.
25. In my opinion, it would be appropriate to analyse the comparative value of the acquired land, as assessed by the Collector, for the acquisition carried out in the years September, 1992; December, 1995 and May, 1996. The same is enumerated for different villages in the table below:
...........................................................................................................................................................................
Village Amount awarded vide Amount awarded vide Amount awarded vide
notification dated 10/12.9.1992 notification dated 11.12.1995 notification dated
per acre in ` per acre in ` 24.5.1996 per acre
in `
..........................................................................................................................................................................
Chirhara 1,10,000/- for Chahi and 1,43,000/- for chahi and
Gair Mumkin Gair Mumkin;
85,000/- for Barani; 1,15,000/- for Barani;
1,25,000/- near road on NH 71 1,65,000/- upto two acres
2,00,000/- upto two acres on of the road; and
NH 8. 6,00,000/- upto two acres on
NH-8.
Suthani 80,000/- for Chahi; 1,00,000/- for Chahi;
60,000/- for Barani; 94,000/- for Barani
40,000/- for Banjar; 1,50,000/- for Gair Mumkin
1,10,000/- for Gair Mumkin. 1,54,000/- upto two acres near
the road.
Jaliawas 80,000/- for Chahi; 1,10,000/- for Chahi; 3,00,000/- for Chahi;
60,000/- for Barani 94,000/- for Barani; 9,00,000/- upto two
40,000/- for Banjar; 1,43,000/- for Gair Mumkin acres on NH-8.
1,10,000/- for Gair Mumkin; 1,54,000/- upto two acres on
2,00,000/- on NH-8 and both sides of the road; and
1,50,000/- on Rewari-Bawal road 6,00,000/- upto two acres on
both sides of NH-8.
Suthana 80,000/- for Chahi; 1,00,000/- for Chahi;
60,000/- for Barani; 72,000/- for Banjar;
40,000/- for Banjar; 1,54,000/- upto two acres on
1,10,000/- for Gair Mumkin; the road
2,00,000/- upto two acres on 6,00,000/- upto two acres on
on NH-8 NH-8.
1,25,000/- on Rewari-Bawal road
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [12]
Asalwas 90,000/- for Chahi; 1,25,000/- for Chahi;
85,000/- for Barani; 6,00,000/- upto two acres on
55,000/- for Bhud; NH-8.
1,35,000/- for Gair Mumkin;
2,00,000/- upto two acres on
NH-8.
Jalalpur 80,000/- for Chahi; 1,10,000/- for Chahi; and
1,10,000/- upto two acres on 1,43,000/- for Gair Mumkin."
both sides of road.
26. In the table extracted below, even the percentage of increase within a period of three years and three months has also been calculated for different categories of land:
.......................................................................................................................................................................
Village Nature of land Amount awarded vide Amount awarded Increase
notification dated vide notification
10/12.9.1992 per dated 11.12.1995
acre in ` per acre in `
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Chirhara
Chahi & Gair
Mumkin 1,10,000/- 1,43,000/- 30%
Barani 85,000/- 1,15,000/- 35.29%
State Highway No. 71 1,125,000/- 1,65,000/- 32%
N.H. No. 8 2,00,000/- 6,00,000/- 200%
Suthani
Chahi 80,000/- 1,00,000/- 25%
Barani 60,000/- 94,000/- 56.67%
Banjar 40,000/-
Gair Mumkin 1,10,000/-
Jaliawas
Chahi 80,000/- 1,10,000/- 37.50%
Barani 60,000/- 94,000/- 56.67%
Banjar 40,000/-
Gair Mumkin 1,10,000/- 1,43,000/- 30%
N.H. No. 8 2,00,000/- 6,00,000/- 200%
Rewari-Bawal road 1,50,000/- 1,54,000/- 2.67%
Asalwas
Chahi 90,000/- 1,25,000/- 38.89%
Barani 85,000/-
Bhud 55,000/-
Gair Mumkin 1,35,000/-
N.H. No. 8 2,00,000/- 6,00,000/- 200%
R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [13]
Suthana
Chahi 80,000/- 1,00,000/- 25%
Barani 80,000/-
Banjar 40,000/- 72,000/- 80%
Gair Mumkin 1,10,000/-
N.H. No. 8 2,00,000/- 6,00,000/- 200%
Rewari-Bawal road 1,25,000/- 1,54,000/- 23.2%
Jalalpur
Chahi 80,000/- 1,10,000/- 37.5%
Gair Mumkin 1,10,000/- 1,43,000/- 30%
27. If from the table extracted above, we analyse the figures mentioned therein, the same suggest that in the time gap of three years and three months, as far as the land pertaining to village Chirhara is concerned, the increase in the value of land abutting National Highway No. 8 is to the tune of 200% and as far as other categories of land is concerned, the increase was in the range of 3% to 35%.
28. For the land pertaining to village Jaliawas, adjoining to the land of village Chirhara, the increase is to the extent of 200% for the land abutting National Highway No. 8, however, for Rewari-Bawal road, the same was merely 2.67%. For Chahi land, the increase was 37.5% ; for Gair Mumkin kind of land, the same was 30% and for Barani kind of land, it was 56.67%
29. For the land pertaining to village Suthana, which is adjoining to the land of village Jaliawas, the increase in the value on National Highway No. 8 remains 200%, whereas on Rewari-Bawal road, the same was 52.2%; for Chahi kind of land, the increase was 25%, whereas for Banjar kind of land, the increase was to the extent of 80%.
30. As far as the land pertaining to village Suthani, which is adjoining to the land of village Suthana, is concerned, there is huge variation, namely, for Chahi kind of land, the increase is 25%, whereas for Barani kind of land, the same is 57%.
31. For the land pertaining to village Asalwas, the increase is to the extent of 38.89% for Chahi kind of land, whereas increase in the value on National Highway No. 8 is 200%.
32. As far as land pertaining to village Jalalpur is concerned, there is increase of 37.5% for Chahi kind of land and for Gair Mumkin kind of land, the increase is to the extent of 30%.
33. Though the percentage increase in the period of 3 years and 3 months for the land located on National Highway for all the villages was uniform, i.e., 200%, however, for the land located on Rewari-Bawal road, which goes through National Highway No. 8, the increase for the land pertaining to village R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [14] Chirhara is 32%, whereas for the land pertaining to Jaliawas, the increase is merely 2.67%. For the land pertaining to village Suthana, which is located beyond village Jaliawas and is at a more distance from National Highway No. 8, the increase awarded for the land abutting Rewari-Bawal road was 23%.
34. As far as potentiality of the land is concerned, it is not in dispute that vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 10/12.9.1992, big chunk of land measuring 8,789 kanals and 11 marlas pertaining to nine villages was acquired for development thereof as industrial estate. After development and providing all the infrastructural facilities, the plots were offered for sale in the year 1997. Meaning thereby within the intervening period, the process for development must be on. With the kind of development activity in the area, the prices of the land certainly shoot up. The same is evident not only from the award of the Collector in the present case, but also even the award of the Collector pertaining to acquisition of land in the same area vide notification dated 24.5.1996, where for the land of village Jaliawas, the value thereof upto the depth of two acres on National Highway No. 8, was assessed @ ` 9,00,000/- per acre and for chahi kind of land and behind that, the same was assessed at ` 3,00,000/- per acre. It shows that within a period of six months, there was 50% increase in the value of land situated on National Highway No. 8 within a period of six months, whereas for Chahi kind of land situated behind that, the increase was to the extent of 173%.
35. A perusal of the site plan produced by learned counsel for the Corporation in court shows that barring at 4-5 locations, where the acquired land was in pockets consisting of 10-15 acres each, the other portions were quite small, may be even less than acre. Even in the aforesaid 4-5 portions of land, the owner thereof will not be a single person.
36. In terms of the provisions of the Act, as referred to earlier, the Collector is required to announce the award determining the value of the acquired land only with the prior approval of the appropriate government or such other officer authorised in this behalf. Meaning thereby it was noticed even by the authorities concerned that value of the land in the area especially on the road had shoot up to the extent of 200% within a time gap of three years and three months considering the pace of development there, as the award of the Collector of the land situated on National Highway No. 8 for the acquisition carried out vide notification dated 10/12.9.1992 was ` 2,00,000/- per acre, which was increased to ` 6,00,000/- per acre. Considering and relying the aforesaid principle, in my opinion, the value of the acquired land in question deserves to be assessed in the same proportion. As against the assessment of value of the land vide notification R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [15] dated 10/12.9.1992 @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre, this court had assessed the same @ ` 4,00,000/- per acre, vide judgment in Gindori's case (supra). Granting increase of 200% thereon, the value thereof is assessed @ ` 12,00,000/- per acre. The land owners shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits available to them under the Act. The impugned award of the learned court below is modified only to the extent of the value of the land. The depth upto which this amount of compensation is to be paid would remain the same.
37. Though for other portions of land also, substantial increase has been shown, but the same vary from 2.67% to 80%, when learned senior counsel appearing for the Corporation was confronted with this variation, he was unable to justify the same. The fact remains that on account of development in the area, where large chunk of land had already been acquired for the purpose of development of Industrial Growth Centre and the land acquired vide notification in question was merely some left out or released small portions of land, the value thereof even if not increased to the extent of 200% during this intervening period, but award of increase @ 150% would certainly be justifiable. In Gindori's case (supra), for the land acquired vide notification dated 10/12.9.1992, which was abutting Rewari-Bawal road, the value was assessed @ ` 3,00,000/- per acre and for rest of the land, the same was assessed @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre. Awarding increase @ 150%, the value of the land on Rewari-Bawal road is assessed @ ` 7,50,000/- per acre. For rest of the land, granting increase @ 100%, the same is assessed @ ` 4,00,000/- per acre. The land owners shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits available to them under the Act.
38. As far as sale deeds produced on record by both the parties are concerned, in my opinion, the same are only to be noticed and rejected.
Considering the fact that undisputedly the acquisition carried out vide notification dated 10/12.9.1992 was under challenge before this court on the ground of discrimination, in which the issue regarding discrimination in the acquisition was also raised. From a perusal of the site plan produced on record by learned counsel for the Corporation in the court, it is very well evident that power under the Act for acquisition of land was misused rather than used. Small portions of land at number of places had been left out and similar was the position with regard to land abutting National Highway No. 8. The allegations made in Bhoop Singh's case (supra) was that the land owned by influential persons had either been left out from acquisition initially or was released later on. The sale transactions entered into between the parties, which have been produced on record, can be said to be distress sales as no one was assured of the fact as to whether the entire land will be R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [16] released from acquisition or even the left out portions will also be acquired. The same did not depict the fair value of the acquired land on the date the transactions were entered into. Majority of the sale deeds produced on record by the State were pertaining to the period prior to the acquisition of land vide notification dated 10/12.9.1992, which had already been considered in Gindori's case (supra).
39. To sum up, in view of my aforesaid discussion, the impugned award of the learned court below is modified to the extent that value of the acquired land on National Highway No. 8 is assessed @ ` 12,00,000/- per acre as against ` 8,00,000/- per acre. On Rewari-Bawal road, the same is assessed @ ` 7,50,000/- per acre as against ` 8,00,000/- per acre, whereas for rest of the land, the award of the learned court below assessing fair value of the land @ ` 4,00,000/- per acre, is upheld. The land owners shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available to them under the Act.
40. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6515 of 2009 - Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation v. Pran Sukh and others, decided on 17.8.2010, to ensure that the landowners are not fleeced by the middleman in the process of disbursement of enhanced compensation, issued certain directions. I deem it appropriate to issue same directions in the present set of appeals as well. The same are as under:
"With a view to ensure that the land owners are not fleeced by the middleman, we deem it appropriate to issue following further directions:
(i) The Land Acquisition Collector shall depute officers subordinate to him not below the rank of Naib Tehsildar, who shall get in touch with all the land owners and/or their legal representatives and inform them about their entitlement and right to receive enhanced compensation.
(ii) The concerned officers shall also instruct the land owners and/or their legal representatives to open savings bank account in case they already do not have such account.
(iii) The bank account numbers of the land owners should be given to the Land Acquisition Collector within three months.
(iv) The Land Acquisition Collector shall deposit the cheques of compensation in the bank accounts of the land owners."R.F.A. No. 3541 of 2006, [17]
41. The appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated above.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge September 14,2010 mk (Refer to Reporter)