Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. Shri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioners, referring to the Order, 2015, submitted that for any award declared on or after 01.09.2015, the amount payable as compensation is to be determined by the Competent Authority in accordance with the provisions of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 as well as the Order, 2015. However, the Competent Authority had declared the awards only taking into consideration the First Schedule of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 and it had not taken into consideration rehabilitation and resettlement award in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013. He submitted that Section 31 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 provides that the rehabilitation and resettlement award is to be declared for each affected family in terms of the entitlements provided in the Second Schedule. Thus, the Competent Authority was legally bound to declare the rehabilitation and resettlement award in accordance with Second Schedule of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013. He had placed reliance on Section 38 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, which provides that the possession of the land shall be taken after ensuring that full and final payment of compensation as well as rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements are paid or tendered to the entitled persons within a period of three months for compensation and a period of six months for the monetary part of the rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements listed in the Second Schedule commencing from the date of the award made under Section 30 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013.

10. The petitioners herein are similarly situated and, therefore, are entitled for the same relief.

11. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. "

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED
11. Per contra, Shri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Limited5 vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that Section 31 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 pertains to the rehabilitation and resettlement award for affected families by the Collector. The term affected family has been defined in Section 3 (c) of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, which refers to the term family, which has been defined in Section 3 (m) of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013. He submitted that for construction of the DFC, 0.0050 hec. land of Khasra No.690/3 was acquired and notification dated 16.1.2015 and declaration dated 21.12.2015 under Section 20A and 20E of the Act, 1989 were published. Thereafter, the Competent Authority had declared the award dated 30.07.2016.

15. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted that in order to claim the benefits of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Schedule II of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, the landowner is under an obligation to prove that due to the said acquisition, the landowner has lost his entire or majority of the landholding, which has resultantly forced him to relocate to a new place or that the landowner is primarily dependent on the land under acquisition and as a result of acquisition of the entire land, which is the only source of livelihood, he has been forced to relocate to a new place to carry on his business. So far as the benefits of Choice of Annuity or Employment under Second Schedule of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 is concerned, the scheme of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 is applicable only in cases where the landowner, whose land is acquired, and the family, whose source of livelihood is primarily dependent upon such land, is dislocated and compelled to change his place of residence or business due to such acquisition. The Second Schedule of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 refers to Sections 31 (1), 38 (1), and 105 (3) of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 and these Sections do not contain any provision in respect of this component of Choice of Annuity or Employment. Further, no documentary evidence was filed by the petitioners to prove their entitlement for aforesaid benefits. Furthermore, in absence of any provision by the appropriate Government, benefits of Choice of Annuity or Employment under Schedule II of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 cannot be granted to the petitioners.

The Second Schedule provides for the element of rehabilitation and resettlement entitlement for all the affected families in addition to those provided in the First Schedule .

29. In the instant matter, in view of the aforementioned two Schedules, we find that two types of awards under the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013 are there. The first type of award deals with the matter, which is accorded under Chapter IV and detailed procedures are enshrined under Sections 26 to 30 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013. The second type of the award is enshrined under Chapter-V of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, which deals with the rehabilitation and resettlement award. This Chapter provides the manner in which the award should be determined by the Collector. Chapter VI deals with the procedure and manner of rehabilitation and resettlement. Therefore, it is clear from the scheme of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, that the issue with regard to rehabilitation and resettlement is an independent consideration, which has nothing to do with the compensation paid to the land owner towards the acquisition of the land under Chapter-V.