Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhupinder Singh A Nd Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 December, 2014
Author: Ashutosh Mohunta
Bench: Ashutosh Mohunta
CWP No. 26446 of 2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 26446 of 2014
Date of decision: 23.12.2014
Bhupinder Singh and another ...Petitioners
Vs.
Union of India and others ...Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAJ RAHUL GARG.
Present: Mr. Premjit Kalia, Advocate, for the petitioners. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J., (ORAL) Notice of motion.
On our asking, Mr. Alok Jain, Central Government Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of Union of India/respondent No.1, Mr. Rishi Kaushal, Advocate for NHAI/respondent No.2 and Mr. Gurinder Pal Singh, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over two copies of the petition to each of the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.
In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, no reply-affidavit is required to be filed by the respondents.
The petitioners are residents of Village Verka, Tehsil and District Amritsar. Their land, as fully described in para SMRITI No.2 of the writ petition, had been acquired by respondents No.1 2014.12.24 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No. 26446 of 2014 -2- and 2 under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as '1956 Act'). The award was also passed by the Land Acquisition Collector/Competent Authority.
The petitioners' main grievance is that while assessing the compensation, the benefits of Sections 23 and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as '1894 Act'), namely, solatium and interest were not granted to him despite the fact that this Court in M/s Golden Iron and Steel Forgings versus Union of India and others, 2011 (4) RCR (Civil) 375, has categorically held that even in the case of acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956, the above mentioned two statutory benefits are equally admissible to the affected land- owners. The petitioners also relies upon two decisions of this Court, dated 27.9.2012 passed in CWP No.7457 of 2012 (Bhag Singh and another versus Commissioner, Jalandhar Division and others) and dated 27.9.2012 passed in CWP No.14642 of 2012 (Prem Kaur versus Union of India and others) whereby the benefits of solatium and interest in terms of the above-cited decisions of this Court, have been extended to the similarly situated landowners.
Another grievance of the petitioners is that besides submission of applications etc., they are running from pillar to post before the officers of respondent No.2-National Highways SMRITI 2014.12.24 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No. 26446 of 2014 -3- Authority for the release of above-mentioned benefits but the same are withheld only on the plea that no directions have been given by this Court in his case. The aggrieved petitioners have now approached this Court.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and gone through the record.
The principles laid down by this Court in Golden Iron and Steel Forgings's case (supra), are not in dispute. Similarly, the fact that the benefits of solatium and interest have been extended by this Court to the similarly situated land-owners vide order dated 27.09.2012 in Bhag Singh's case (supra), can also be hardly disputed. In these circumstances, we are of the view that it is imperative upon respondents No.1 & 2 to consider the petitioners' claim for the grant of solatium and interest in accordance with the decision of this Court in Golden Iron and Steel Forgings's case (supra).
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the following terms:-
(i) The petitioners shall move an application before the notified Competent Authority-cum-
Land Acquisition Collector within a period of one month for the grant of aforesaid benefits;
(ii) The said Competent Authority will issue SMRITI 2014.12.24 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No. 26446 of 2014 -4- notice and call for the records/reply from the National Highway Authority of India;
(iii) The Competent Authority shall thereafter determine whether or not the petitioners are entitled to the aforesaid benefits, especially in view of the decisions of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the claimant(s);
(iv) If the petitioners are found entitled to, a self speaking supplementary Award to this effect shall be passed within a period of four months from the date of filing of the application;
(v) The National Highways Authority of India shall deposit the amount, if any, payable in terms of supplementary award, in interest- bearing fixed deposit account(s) in any nationalized bank within one month from the date of passing of the supplementary award and disbursement thereof shall be subject to the final decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.10695 of 2011 titled as Golden Iron & Steel Forgins vs. SMRITI 2014.12.24 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No. 26446 of 2014 -5- Union of India & Ors. and Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.15104 of 2014 titled:
Project Director, National Highway, No.1A vs. Rajeshwar Singh and Ors.
Disposed of.
Dasti.
(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE (RAJ RAHUL GARG) JUDGE 23.12.2014 smriti SMRITI 2014.12.24 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document