Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: deduction for development charges in The Special Tahsildar (La) vs Vadivel ... 1St on 12 March, 2010Matching Fragments
19. Deduction towards Development charges:-
Placing reliance upon (2009) 5 MLJ 2 [Special Tahsildar, Neighbourhood Scheme, Erode, Erode District v. Jaganathan Gounder and another], Mr.Ravi, learned Special Government Pleader and Mr.Veerasekaran, learned counsel for Tamil Nadu Housing Board submitted that 40% deduction should be made towards development cost and 20% on account of small size of plot taken as basis to arrive at the market value. It was further submitted that having regard to the nature of small size of plot, Reference Court was not right in making 1/3rd deduction and more deduction ought to have been made.
20. After fixing the value at Rs.10,000/- per cent, Reference Court has made 1/3rd deduction for development charges i.e. for formation of road, sewer and other development charges. While fixing the market value, necessary deduction are to be made towards development charges. In such cases, the LAO must record reasons about the disadvantage of the land acquired and the purpose for which the land was sought to be acquired as well as the percentage of land necessary for providing developments like provision of roads, electricity, water and sewerage and other facilities. The extent of deduction cannot be put in a straitjacket formula and it varies from case to case. The Supreme Court had time and again indicated the factors to be considered by the LAO for making deduction towards development charges as well as percentage of deduction. Such deduction is also not automatic unless there is a factual finding that deduction was absolutely necessary in the facts of the case by taking into consideration the ground situation. In case the property has already been developed, there would be no requirement of deduction towards development.
21. In 2008 (13) SCALE 202 [Naganath (dead) by LRs. v. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer and another], the Supreme Court observed that the trend of the various Judgments of the Supreme Court indicates deduction on account of development charges in the range of 1/6th to 33%.
22. The Supreme Court in Atma Singh v. State of Haryana [(2008) 3 MLJ 806 (SC)] referred to an earlier decision relating to deduction towards development charges, in Bhagwathula Samanna v. Special Tahsildar & Land Acquisition Officer, AIR 1991 SC 2298 : (1991) 4 SCC 506 : (1992) 1 MLJ 9, wherein it was held as follows:-
25. It is true that deduction for development charges ought to be adequately provided for, but it varies from place to place, area to area and amount of development which are required to be carried out and thus there cannot be any fixed amount of deduction towards development charges.
26. In this case, large extent of lands measuring 44.37.0 Hectares were acquired for implementation of Satellite Town by Tamil Nadu Housing Board. In his evidence, RW2-Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board has stated that the acquired lands were full of thorny bushes and need to reclaimed for forming layouts. In his evidence, RW2 further stated that for formation of road, laying water and electricity lines, Tamil Nadu Housing board has to spend huge amount. In his evidence, RW2 has also stated that access roads are also to be formed from the main road for which huge amount will have to be spent. Evidence of RW2 would clearly show that the acquired lands are only agricultural lands and huge amount has to be spent for development cost. Even though the lands possess potential for further development, no development had taken place in the acquired lands. Large block of land will have to be developed by preparing a layout plan, carving out roads, leaving open spaces, plotting out smaller plots and also forming access roads. Tamil Nadu Housing Board will have to wait for purchasers and in the mean while, the invested money will be blocked up. These factors can be balanced by making a deduction by way of allowance at an appropriate rate ranging approximately between 20% to 50% to account for the land required to be set apart for carving out lands and plotting out small plots. To make up for the area of the land which is used in providing civic amenities and the waiting period, a deduction of 40% would be appropriate. As pointed out earlier, the value taken by the Reference Court at Rs.10,000/- per cent is maintained. Deducting 40%, the value of the acquired land is enhanced to Rs.6,000/- from Rs.720/- fixed by the LAO, value fixed by the Reference Court is reduced from Rs.7,000/- to Rs.6,000/- per cent.