IMPORTANT POINT
Compensation for land acquired under the old Act must be determined using the provisions of the new Act if the award was not made before the new Act's commencement.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel representing the respondent No.4.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioners, without there being any ambiguity in his mind has confined his prayer for issuing a direction to the authorities concerned for calculation of payment of the amount of compensation for acquisition of land belonging to the Petitioners, in terms of the provisions contained in the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2013).

3. Certain lands belonging to the petitioners came to be acquired. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 2/7/2009 in respect of certain lands owned by the Petitioners. The Petitioner No.1 was owner in possession of land comprised in Gat Nos.15 and 17, situated at village Choundi, Taluka Udgir, District Latur. The Petitioner No.2 was the owner in possession of land comprised in Gat No.18, situated in the same village and Petitioner No.3 was the owner in possession of land Gat No.11, situated at the same village.

4. The notification under Section 6(1) of the Act of 1894 was issued on 6/5/2010, however, it is contended by the petitioners that as per requirement and mandate of Section 11-A of the Act of 1894, the award in respect of the said acquisition could not be made within the time prescribed therein and ultimately, the award was made on 22/3/2016. The submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners is that, after enforcement of the Act of 2013 w.e.f. 1/1/2014, the acquisitions made under the old Act can be saved under Section 24 of the Act of 2013 where no award under Section 11 of the old Act was made, only by applying the provisions of the Act of 2013 so far as determination of compensation is concerned. It is his submission that though award in respect of the lands in question was made on 22/3/2016, however, while determining the compensation as per the market value of land under Section 26, the reference date taken by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is the date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act of 1894 i.e. 2/7/2009 and not 1/1/2014 which is the date of enforcement of the Act of 2013.

5. Our attention has been drawn by learned counsel for the Petitioners to a D.O. letter dated 26/10/2015, issued by the Government of India, whereby certain clarifications were made by the Government of India on query made by the State of Maharashtra. One such query made was, “For calculation of market value, under Section 24(1)(a), reference date should be 1/1/2014 i.e. (commencement of the Act of 2013) or the date of issuing preliminary notification under Land Acquisition Act, 1894?”. Answering the said query, the Government of India, in the Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, vide Notification/ Demi Official letter dated 26/10/2015, clearly stated that, “The reference date for calculation of market value, under Section 24(1)(a) should be 1/1/2014.” It is, thus, the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioners that, while calculating the compensation, in the instant case, the date of reference has been taken to be 2/7/2009 i.e. the date when Section 24(1)(a) of the Act of 1894 was issued and not 1/1/2014, which is the date of commencement of the Act of 2013 and such calculation of quantum of compensation is manifestly illegal being completely arbitrary.

6. On the other hand, the learned A.G.P. representing the Respondent State as also learned counsel representing the respondent No.4 have stated that all these aspects can be looked into in a reference to be made by the petitioners under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 before the Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority created under Section 54.

7. It has thus been argued that the instant Petition may not be entertained on account of availability of alternate remedy under the Act of 2013