Rajiv Sarin & Anr vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors on 9 August, 2011
7. In this backdrop, it was submitted that Section 16 of the said
Ordinance and Rule 14 of the said Rules were violative of Articles 14, 19
and 300-A of the Constitution of India because of the non-consideration
of the expenditure incurred by the petitioners towards leasehold rights in
the lands / surface rights, mine infrastructure and consents and approvals
obtained by the petitioners for excavation of coal from the coal blocks.
Reliance was placed on Rajeev Sarin and Another v. State of
Uttarakhand and Others: 2011 (8) SCC 708 (paras 72 to 84) and K.T.
Plantation Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka: 2011 (9) SCC 1 (paras 189
and 191). It was submitted that deprivation of property under Article
300-A could only be on payment of compensation which was just, fair
and reasonable. It was submitted that under the impugned provisions as
W.P.(C) No. 973/2015 & Ors Page 12 of 43
being interpreted by the respondents, fair and just compensation is to be
paid to the prior allottees for the following:-