The court held that a government circular excluding one year of sale instances from land valuation violates statutory provisions, requiring adherence to all sale instances in the three years before acquisition notifications.

JUDGMENT :

Aarti Sathe, J.

1. This is a batch of writ petitions which raise common issue of law and fact. They are accordingly being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The challenge in these petitions is primarily to a circular dated 24^th January 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the “impugned circular”) issued by the State Government through its Revenue and Forest Department, which is issued on the basis of orders passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the State of Haryana and Another Vs. Smt. Chander Kanta @ Kanta & Ors., R.F.A. No. 3469 of 2019 providing that from the date of issuance of a notification to acquire the land, sale instances which pertain to a period within one year before the issuance of such notification, would be required to be discarded and the land acquisition compensation shall be arrived at the actual market price prior to such period of one year and that on the basis of such fair market price the reasonable rates of compensation would be fixed. Illustratively, it was set out in the impugned circular that if the acquisition notification is published on 5^th January 2023, then the sale instances retrospectively from 4^th January 2023 to 4^th January 2022 would not be considered. It was notified that this would be applicable not only to the said project, but also to all the projects where the land acquisition is being undertaken.

3. The prayers as made in these petitions are similar. In some of the petitions, there are further prayers challenging the constitutional validity of Explanation 1 to Section 26 (1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “2013 Act”). For convenience, we note “the prayers” as also “the facts” as set out in (Writ Petition No. 10143 of 2023, Santosh Ramchandra Balkawade) which we would consider to be the lead petition. The prayers as made in the said writ petition read thus:-

“A) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of certiorari or a Writ, Order and or Directions in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing and setting aside the Government resolution dated 24/01/2023.

B) That in the Alternative to Prayer clause A, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or a Writ Order and a Direction in the nature of Writ of mandamus holding that the Explanation 1 to Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is Ultra vires, Arbitrary and Void to the extent that sale instances/agreement to sale of one year prior to the date of notification should be excluded.

C) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or a Writ Order and a Direction in the nature of Writ of mandamus holding that the Explanation 1 to Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 would mean to include sale instances of the last 3 years from the date of Notification.

D) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ, Order of Mandamus or a Writ of Mandamus or Direction to the Respondent that the Government resolution dated 14/12/2022 does not apply the notification issued under the Maharashtra Highway Act, 1955 for Acquisition of the Ring Road Project.

E) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ, Order and Direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus holding and declaring that the law stated in Judgment and order dated 25/04/2022 in RFA No. 3469/2019 and Judgment and order dated 19/04/2022 in RAF No. 309/2021 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Har