THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE A PERSON'S PROPERTY UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT IS COUPLED WITH A DUTY TO PAY COMPENSATION AND IT IS IMPLIED IN THE SAID DUTY THAT THE SAID COMPENSATION PAYABLE SHOULD BE PAID AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE.

B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) WHICH came into force from 20-6-1979, the said fundamental right was transformed as a constitutional guarantee under Art. 300-A of the Indian Constitution. The lands, in the instant case, were acquired in the year 1977 by issuing a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) followed by draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act. The lands were acquired for the public purpose of reconstructing F. T. I, tank bed pursuant to the requisition of the Executive Engineer, PWD ID Division, Karimnagar dated 25-3-1977. After award enquiry, the Award was passed on 15-1-1979. As on that day, Article 31 was in the Constitution Book and was deleted with effect from 20-6-1979, but again was transformed as a constitutional guarantee. For ensuring that a person is not deprived of his property, save by authority of law, it does not matter as to whether it is fundamental right or the constitutional guarantee as in either case, the State or any other authority cannot deprive any person of his property otherwise than due process of law. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended from time to time, the latest amendment being by Central Act 68 of 1984 is such an Act, which empowers the Government to acquire the lands of a person. The said Act vests the authorities of the State to take over a person s property for public purpose, but with corresponding obligation to pay the compensation in lieu thereof. The said obligation is not discharged merely because proceedings have been initiated under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and by following the procedure prescribed thereunder a person has been dispossessed. If the compensation is not paid after such acquisition and dispossession, pursuant to the said acquisition the fundamental right hitherto available under Art. 31 of the Indian Constitution or the constitutional guarantee, which is now provided under Article 300-A of the Constitution will get violated. The right to acquire a person s property under the Land Acquisition Act is coupled with a duty to pay compensation and it is implied in the said duty that the said compensation payable should be paid as expeditiously as possible. If there is either failure to pay compensation or if there is an abnormal delay in payment of compensation, there will be violation of fundamental right, which was hitherto available under Article 31 of the Indian Constitution and constitutional guarantee, which is now available under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, and whenever such a violation is pointed out, a constitutional court like this, cannot be a silent spectator and has to step in to issue a writ to set the things right and to remedy the situation so that the constitutional obligation of the Government is duly discharged. No fetters can be placed on the powers of this Court to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The mere fact that remedy is available by way of execution petition under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, shall not prevent a Constitutional Court if a situation of this nature arises to exercise the powers of writ jurisdiction. By the by, what is available in execution in a decree against the Government? It is only rickety chairs and tables, which cannot satisfy even a fraction of the decree and in fact several such decrees will be pending so also attachments after attachments. That will not serve the real purpose and effectual justice is not done by following that technical procedure. Courts are not sitting for doing technical justice in just following the procedure. Steps have to be taken to do effectual justice. In execution proceedings for failure to discharge the decree, a power vests in the Civil Court to detain the judgment-debtor in civil prison till the decree is discharged. But, in the instant case, against a Governmental decree, who is to be put in prison? It cannot be an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document