Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Reshma Devi vs State & Ors on 17 October, 2008
Author: H.R.Panwar
Bench: H.R.Panwar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
O R D E R
S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 661/2008
(Smt. Reshma Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
.........
Date of Order : 17/10/2008
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR
Mr. Sudhir Sharma for the petitioner.
Mr. K.L.Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State.
Mr. P.P.Chaudhary for the respondent No.3.
BY THE COURT
After having heard the matter finally, the counsel for the parties by an application being I.A. No.14351/08 submit that the writ petition may be disposed of in view of the compromise agreement entered into by the petitioner and the respondent No.3 M/s V.S.Lignite Power Pvt. Ltd. in respect of the acquisition of land which is subject matter of the instant writ petition.
The land in question is situated in village Gurha, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) for acquisition of the land for public purpose for setting up Lignite based Electricity Generation Power Plant, was issued. The 2 notification under Section 6 r/w Section 17 (4) of the Act was also published after following due process of law. The award has been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and as per the direction of the Land Acquisition Officer, the amount of compensation as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer has already been deposited by the respondent No.3 company with the authorised officer of the respondent State and the possession of the land has already been handed over long back to the respondent company. However, the acquisition proceedings came to be challenged by way of instant writ petition by the petitioner who is recorded Khatedar/ interested person.
During pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner and the respondent company have mutually agreed to enter into a compromise in order to settle the dispute in respect of the land in question which is subject matter of the acquisition through a "Compromise Agreement" annexed with application as Annex.A/1. By the said compromise agreement the respondent company voluntarily agreed to enhance the compensation in addition to what has been deposited by the company and accepted by the petitioner and the respondent company is prepared to deposit the enhanced differential compensation with the Land Acquisition Officer as per the directions of this Court and the petitioner/ interested persons would be free to withdraw the same. The petitioner undertakes to surrender all the original 3 title documents that are in her possession relating to the land in question. On receipt of the enhanced differential compensation under the agreement, the petitioner shall have no right, possession, lien, title on the land and shall not dispute the acquisition of the land, compensation awarded and quantum of compensation. The petitioner also agrees that she has no grievance with the process followed by the respondents for acquisition of the land which was acquired by respondent State for the respondent company and the petitioner's claim through this writ petition was only to the extent of enhancement of compensation. The Compromise Agreement has been entered into on 26th September, 2008 between the petitioner and the respondent No.3 company.
Learned counsel for the parties on the basis of undertaking dt. 26.09.2008 by authorised representative of the respondent No.3 company further submit that in this particular case, in earlier survey, certain trees, construction, reservoir etc. having height of more than 3 feet, if any, which have not been noticed and therefore, on re-survey if such trees, reservoir or construction is found then the respondent No.3 company would assess and pay the compensation for that separately directly to the petitioner/ interested person.
Since the parties have settled the dispute by the compromise agreement Annex.A/1 and therefore, learned 4 counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives in the writ petition and the same may be disposed of in terms of the compromise agreement Annex.A/1 annexed with the application.
The writ petition is therefore, disposed of in terms of the Compromise Agreement (Annex.A/1) annexed with the application. The said Compromise Agreement Annex.A/1 is made Rule of the Court and shall form the part of this order. The respondent company shall deposit the enhanced differential compensation with the Land Acquisition Officer within a period of four weeks and the petitioner/ interested person would be free to withdraw the same. Further, on re-survey if trees, reservoir or construction etc., which have not been included in earlier survey, are found then the respondent No.3 company would assess and pay the compensation for that separately directly to the petitioner/ interested person. The Applications being I.A. No. 14351/08 and 14215/08 stand disposed of.
(H.R.PANWAR), J.
rp 5 S.B.CIVIL MISC. STAY PETITION NO. 1075/2008 IN S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 661/08 Date of Order : 17/10/2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Sudhir Sharma for the petitioner.
Mr. K.L.Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State. Mr. P.P.Choudhary for the respondent No.3.
Since the writ petition itself has been disposed of, the stay petition also stands disposed of.
(H.R.PANWAR), J.
rp