Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: dfccil in Bhupal Singh And Ors vs The Union Of India And Ors on 10 May, 2023Matching Fragments
The order dated 9.4.2013 of the Commissioner, Patna Division was challenged by the DFCCIL under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Arbitration Act' in short) in the Court of learned District Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram and the same was registered as Civil Misc. Case No.39 of 2013. The said case was dismissed by order dated 18.6.2018.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that neither the possession of the land acquired having been taken by the respondents nor the amount of compensation having been paid, the petitioners are entitled for payment of compensation as per the Act of 2013. Learned counsel refers to the letter dated 25.5.2015 of the General Manager, DFCCIL written to the Chief Project Managers, EDFC and WDFC brought on record as annexure to the second supplementary counter affidavit of Patna High Court CWJC No.199 of 2018 dt.10-05-2023 DFCCIL to submit that from perusal of the same it would clearly transpire that the entitlement matrix approved by the Railway Board is in accordance with the new Act of 2013.
Learned counsel for the DFCCIL submits that pursuant to notification under section 20A of the Railways Act, 1989 published on 24.8.2009, notice under section 20E of the Act was published on 17.8.2010 and as prescribed the award was prepared on 16.6.2011 i.e. within the time prescribed. Not being satisfied with the award, the petitioners went before the Arbitrator under section 20F(6) of the Railways Act, however, the Arbitrator by his order dated 19.5.2012 confirmed the award of the DLAO. A review petition was filed by some persons before the Arbitrator which was allowed by order dated 9.4.2013. On the same being allowed, the rectified award was published on 10.5.2013.
It is further case of the respondents that the DFCCIL preferred Civil Misc. Case No.39 of 2013 before the Principal Civil Court which upheld the rectified award of the Arbitrator by its order dated 18.6.2018. This order of the Principal Civil Court was accepted by the DFCCIL and no appeal has been preferred against the same.
Learned counsel for the DFCCIL submits that so far as Patna High Court CWJC No.199 of 2018 dt.10-05-2023 the application of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is concerned, the same is specifically barred under section 20-N of the Railways Act. Further reading of section 105 of the Act of 2013 together with the 4th schedule it would transpire that the provisions of Act of 2013 will not apply to the Railways Act. However, learned counsel for the Railways in reference to the letter dated 25.5.2013 of the GM, DFCCIL with respect to the entitlement matrix having been adopted in accordance with the Act of 2013 submits that clause 2.0 thereof provides that the entitlement matrix shall be applicable for awards (20F) declared after 1.1.2015. So far as the instant case is concerned the award was prepared on 16.6.2011 and even the rectified award was prepared on 10.5.2013.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the DFCCIL.
It may be stated here that the fact one gathers from the materials on record is to the effect that the land of the petitioners and others were acquired in first phase of acquisition for which a declaration under section 20E was published in the gazette on 17.8.2010, the compensation was determined and the award was prepared on 16.6.2011. Not being satisfied with the award, the petitioners moved under section 20F(6) of the Act before the Patna High Court CWJC No.199 of 2018 dt.10-05-2023 Arbitrator who although had confirmed the award of the DLAO, but on review petition being filed, the same was allowed by order dated 9.4.2013.