The State cannot hide behind delay and laches to evade its responsibility to pay compensation for land acquired.

JUDGMENT :

MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI, J.

1. The instant appeal is in assailment of judgment and order passed on February 09, 2022 in WPA 4165 of 2018.

2. Fact giving rise to the present litigation is that an acquisition proceeding was initiated in the year 1971 in respect of 2 Cottah 10 chittack and 36 Sq. ft. of land appertaining to premises No. 351, Prince Anwar Shah Road, Kolkata. An award was declared on January 9, 1979 in favour of predecessor-in-interest of the appellant. Being dissatisfied with the award, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant sent a reference petition for enhancement of compensation. The reference so filed was disposed of on January 03, 1995 by modifications in the award. In the meantime the original owner of the acquired land died and the appellants stepped into her shoes.

3. The appellants did not receive the award amount for which, they came up with the writ petition No. WPA 4165 of 2018 seeking direction upon the respondents for the payment of the compensation.

4. By the impugned order dated February 09, 2022, learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground of stale demand. The impugned order noted that the appellants slept over their demand since January 03, 1995, when the award was finally modified till filing of the writ petition in the year 2018. It was also noted in the impugned order that during all this period of 23 years, the appellants never approached the appropriate court for execution of the award as the award passed under Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911 was executable before the court of Small Causes, Calcutta.

5. It was contended on behalf of the appellants that they were assured by the advocate for the claimant conducting the reference case that they will be informed as and when the award money would be deposited. The said advocate expired on September 20, 2015. Since the money was not paid by the respondents, a notice was served upon the respondent through their advocate demanding the award amount.

6. It has also been submitted on behalf of the appellant that by not making the payment of the award money, the respondents have violated the fundamental rights of the appellants. Learned advocate for the appellants further submitted that learned trial court failed to consider that the appellants advanced sufficient cause which prevented them from approaching the appropriate authorities within due time.

7. Learned advocate for the appellant has relied upon the authority in the case reported in Asmaboo Kurban Hossain and Others vs. Province of Bengal, 1942 Online Cal. 119 on the proposition that Section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure with regard to execution of decree was not applicable in the facts of the present case.

8. Learned advocate for the appellant also submitted that although, a plausible explanation for delayed demand has been put forward, nevertheless, a claim for compensation of land acquisition is constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitutions of India and it has a continuous cause of action. Therefore, no limitation is prescribed for such claim. In support of such proposition, learned advocate for the appellant relied upon Ajet Ali Baidya vs. State of West Bengal, 2022 SCC Online Cal. 1328, B.D. Basnett vs. Collector, East District, Gangtok, Sikkim and Another, (2020) 4 SCC 572 and Sukh Dutt Ratra vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2022) 7 SCC 508.

9. Learned advocate for the appellant also cited the authority in Tukaram Kana Joshi vs. MIDC, (2013) 1 SCC 353 on the proposition that delay in approaching court is not an impediment in exercising judicial discretion and rendering substantial justice.

10. Relying on Mangat Ram Tanwar vs. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 1080 learned advocate for the appellant also contended that States and the Court are duty bound to ensure payment of compensation for land acquisition.

11. On the other hand, the learned advocate for the respondent State submitted that the petitioners sat over their claim for the award money