Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Nerbudda Valley Refrigerated ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 May, 2025
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919
1 WP-16778-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
WRIT PETITION No. 16778 of 2024
THE NERBUDDA VALLEY REFRIGERATED PRODUCTS CO.
PVT. LTD.
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Brian D'silva - Senior Advocate with Ms. Akashmi Trivedi & Shri
Abhishek Dilraj - Advocates for the petitioner.
Shri Prashant Singh - Advocate General with Amit Seth, Additional
Advocate General with Shri Anvesh Shrivastava - Advocate and Shri
Divyansh Tiwari - Advocate for respondent No.3.
Reserved on : 06.12.2024
Delivered on : 17.05.2025
......................................................................................................................................
ORDER
Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India making a prayer to issue writ of mandamus directing respondents to stop all constructions and other activities on land of petitioner and also direct respondents-authorities to pay compensation for destruction caused to the land of petitioner and for any other relief which may deem fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 2 WP-16778-2024
2. Petitioner is a company incorporated as M/s Nerbudda Valley Refrigerated Products Company Pvt. Ltd. and registered under the Companies Act 1956 with its head quarter Hamidia Road, Bhopal. In 1939, petitioner company was granted lease of 12 acres of land of Government of Bhopal. Later on 8.18 acres was surrendered by petitioner-company to Govt. of M.P.. On request of Govt. of M.P., an area of 0.69 acres was further surrendered to State Government of M.P.. After aforesaid development, petitioner- company was having area of 3.13 acres. Petitioner-company is having 30 years lease in respect of said land. Renewal lease was granted for a period i.e. 14.3.1999 to 13.3.2029. Lessee had paid sum of Rs. 51,211/-. Lease of 3.13 acres was granted. No proprietary rights over the said land was granted in favour of petitioner- company but company has right to assign rights to any other person or farm. Under the said lease Khasra Nos. 473/1, 474, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480/2, 481, 482/1, 483, 484/1, 485 and 675/2 measuring 3.13 acres was granted to petitioner company.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that respondents-authority are encroaching over the land of petitioner and making construction over it. Lease granted in favour of petitioner-company is effective and, therefore, there cannot be any encroachment upon the land of petitioner. It is further Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 3 WP-16778-2024 submitted by learned senior counsel that compensation may be granted to petitioner- company for damages caused to it. Construction work is being made and land is being acquired for constructing Metro Railway's Work. He further submitted that if State Govt. wants to acquire the land which is given out on lease by the State, interest of lease holders has to be protected in accordance with provision of Land Acquisition Act. On basis of aforesaid arguments, learned senior counsel for the petitioner made a prayer for allowing writ petition and issue writ in nature mentioned above in favour of petitioner-company. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that petitioner is in possession of land. Procedure for acquisition has not been followed. Notice of 15 days was given though requirement is to give notice for 21 days. Section 9 of the Act has been violated and compensation has not been paid. Effected Khasra Nos. are 473/1, 674/3. There cannot be disturbance in possession of petitioner without paying the compensation and without following procedure formalities.
4. Additional Advocate General appearing for the State as well as counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 are strictly acting in accordance with law. M.P. Metro Railway Corporation Ltd. requested Collector, District Administration for providing operational rights over the land in question and same was granted on Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 4 WP-16778-2024 25.7.2023. Application was filed under Revenue Case Management System (RCMS) for transfer of land. Competent authorities called for objection between 2.7.2024 to 3.7.2024 and same was published in news paper. Petitioner-company did not file any objection. State Govt. is owner of property in question and petitioner is merely a lessee. Compensation amount has already been deposited with Government authorities. It is also submitted that factory is not operational and same is closed. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Inder Parshad Vs. Union of India and others, reported in (1994) 5 SCC 239, holding that Govt. being owner is not required to acquire its own interest in the land. Land in question belonging to ownership of Govt., therefore, no acquisition of right is required. Compensation has already been paid to revenue authorities and revenue authorities may consider the claim and pay compensation to petitioner-company in accordance with law. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed i n National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited Vs. Montecarlo, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 401 wherein Apex Court held that stay may not be granted where Mega Projects are coming up. Stay may impede execution of projects and of public importance and disables the State or it's agencies/ instrumentalities in discharging constitutional and legal obligations towards citizens. In of same, petition may not be entertained and be dismissed.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 5 WP-16778-2024
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. Petitioner was granted lease of land by Nawab of Bhopal for 12 acres of land. Lease was contained covenant of renewal in favour of company for further period of 30 years. Lease was granted for purposes to establish industries for developing refrigerated foodstuffs and for manufacturing ice-cream and dry-ice and other frozen and refrigerated food stuffs, articles and commodities or goods of all kinds. Petitioner company was also granted rights to assign it right under the lease agreement to any person firm or company and said assignee will be bound by the obligations of the company. In case of dispute, matter is to be referred to Tribunal of Arbitrators. Two Arbitrators are to be appointed, one by each party. Differences arose between the petitioner and respondents, therefore, matter under dispute was referred to Arbitrator regarding renewal of lease. Arbitral Tribunal consisting of two Arbitrators passed and award on 24.05.1984. By said award, it was held that petitioner company is entitled for renewal of lease for a period of 99 years on terms and conditions, which were specified in the lease. Said award was called in question in reference before Court of Second Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Arbitration Case No. 24/85. Reference was decided vide order dated 10.09.1987 and award was modified to the extent that same is to be renewed for a period of 30 Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 6 WP-16778-2024 years on same conditions and on increment of rent. Order passed in reference has become final and was not called in question. In award and reference, it is answered that lease in question is permanent and perpetual lease and company has right of renewal. State Government cannot deny compensation to petitioner on ground that they are not acquiring any rights as rights over the land belong to State Government. Lease is perpetual in nature with condition that same may be renewed after a period of 30 years and same is subsisting.
Therefore, State Government is required to pay compensation/damages to petitioner in accordance with law.
7. Payment of compensation and damages is to be made as per the Metro Railways (Construction of Works) Act, 1978. Central Government is required to publish notification declaring its intention to acquire the land, building, street, road or passage, right of user or right in nature of easement. On publication of notification under Section 7 of aforesaid Act gives right to Metro Rail Administration, Officer or employee to enter upon the land and to do survey and take level of the land, building, street, to dig or bore into the sub-soil, to set out the intended work, to mark such levels, boundaries or lines by placing marks and cutting trenches and to do other necessary acts. Care shall be taken not to cause any injury or damage to any land, building, street, road etc. while carrying out the activities. Objections Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 7 WP-16778-2024 are invited under Section 9 of the Act of 1978. Thereafter, declaration of acquisition is to be made under Section 10. On publication of declaration under Section 10(1), the land, building, street, road or passage or right of user or right in nature of easement shall vest absolutely in Central Government free from all encumbrances. After vesting of land in favour of State Government under Section 10(2), competent authority by giving notice in writing to land owner direct him to give possession within period of 60 days from service of notice and on failure, competent authority may apply to take forceful possession. Amount of compensation is to be determined under Section 13 and amount determined shall be deposited by the Central Government with competent authority. On going through the aforesaid provision of law, it is found that right over the land or right of user or right in nature of easement vest absolutely in favour of Central Government free from all encumbrances after publication of declaration under Section 10(1).
8. It has been stated in reply that no injunction can be granted in view of provision of Section 39 of the Act of 1978. Section 39 bars jurisdiction for filing suit or application for injunction. However, there is no bar in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to pass restraint order against respondents. Metro Rail Project has been approved by Government of India, Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 8 WP-16778-2024 Ministry of Urban Development and operational rights on land has also been provided to respondents before actual transfer of land. Office memorandum dated 27.01.2015 is placed on record by respondents. However, respondents had failed to bring on record any notification issued by Central Government under the Act of 1978. Ground raised by respondents that acquisition of land is not required as ownership right is with the State Government and respondents is merely having right to enjoy the land in question cannot be given stamp of approval. It has been held in arbitration case and in also in reference case (supra) that lease is permanent in nature. It is perpetual with a clause of renewal, therefore, respondents will be deprived of their rights to enjoy the land as same is used for construction of Metro Rail Project, therefore, respondents are entitled to compensation and acquisition of land is to be done by respondents in accordance with law.
9. Article 300-A of the Constitution of India lays down that no person shall be deprived of property save by authority of law, which is quoted as under:-
"300-A. Persons not to be deprived of property save by authority of law- No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law."
10. Payment of compensation for acquisition of land is to be Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 9 WP-16778-2024 made under Metro Railways (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002. Though, Act of 1978 gives right of use and easementary right also to a Metro Rail Administration but such right is vested on publication of notification under Section 10(1) and thereafter, possession of land can also be taken. Right of operation by office memorandum of Government of India can only be granted when notification has been issued under Section 7 of the Act of 1978. Respondents are unable to point out any notification which has been published under the Metro Railways (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002. In lease agreement also there is no condition that respondents can cancel the lease in violation of condition.
11. As per Section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, lease of immovable property can be determined by efflux of time, or on happening of an event, by express surrender or implied surrender or by forfeiture. Lease can be determined under Section 111(g) by forfeiture in case lessee breaks an express condition which provides that on breach thereof, lessor may re-enter. Respondents had not taken any steps for determination of lease by forfeiture by issuing notice to petitioner that they had violated condition of lease. Lease was granted for purpose of food and refrigeration work. Now no work of refrigeration or food is being done over the lease land. Petitioners are earning rent from the building which has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:23919 10 WP-16778-2024 constructed, therefore, only interest of petitioner is to get the compensation amount. Metro Rail Project is being constructed for public at large. Individual interest must surrender to the interest of public. Considering the same, no restraint order is passed against respondents in stopping the work of Metro Rail.
12. Petition is disposed off with direction to respondents authorities to give compensation and damages assessing the value of land and structure standing thereof in accordance with Act and make payment of same to petitioner. Said exercise be completed in accordance with provision of the Metro Railways (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002.
13. With aforesaid direction, petition is disposed off.
(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE AD/vkt/$A Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-05-2025 10:56:00