IMPORTANT POINT
The court upheld the validity of the Coal Bearing Areas Act, affirming it does not conflict with the Land Acquisition Act regarding compensation determination.

ORDER :

1. Both the writ petitions heard analogously and decided together by this common order because common facts and question of law has been raised and the grounds of challenge are overlapping with each other.

2. Challenge in these petitions is to declare Sections 4 to 13 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (henceforth ‘the CBA Act 1957’) as ultra vires, illegal, inoperative and violative to the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (henceforth ‘the Land Acquisition Act 2013’).

3........

(i) The submission of the petitioner is that the CBA Act, 1957 which operates on a specific field was not included in the initial Land Acquisition Act, 2013 when it was incorporated for application and the CBA Act, 1957 was placed in Schedule IV which was initially excluded for operation of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. Subsequently, the notification was published on 28-8-2015 wherein in exercise of power under Section 105(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, the CBA Act, 1957 was excluded for the purpose of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 for determination of compensation. Further submission is made that as per Section 3 of the CBA Act, 1957 the appointment of competent authority is within the domain of Central Government, who will determine the quantum of compensation from time to time whereas Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 purports that determination of market value of land is to be done by the Collector alone and different factors have been laid down.

(ii) The further submission of the petitioner is that Section 25 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 specifically mandates that within a period of one year the entire compensation proceeding has to be completed from the date of publication of the declaration whereas the CBA Act, 1957 do not draw timeline, therefore, there is a conflict in interpretation of both the provisions. Consequently, by effect and operation of the notification dated 28-8-2015, the provisions of Sections 4 to 13 of the CBA Act, 1957 would be ultra vires to the main Act, as it cuts through the object, therefore, the same be declared as ultra vires. In support of his contention, learned counsel would place reliance upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Executive Engineer, Gosikhurd Project Ambadi, Bhandara, Maharashtra Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation v. Mahesh and Others, (2022) 2 SCC 772 wherein the Supreme Court has interpreted the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 is reflection of the legislative intent whereby the object is to grant compensation to the land oustees within a specified time the maximum determined value and this object of the Act is defeated by existence of Sections 4 to 13 of the CBA Act, 1957 and, as such, they are ultra vires.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State, per contra, would submit that the applicability of the notification would apply in a limited sphere only for determination of compensation factor and the competent authority would be the same, therefore, it is an incorporation in the legislature from an existing Act. The CBA Act, 1957 bears a specific provision which has the applicability in its own, which cannot be said that it is ultra vires as limited application has been made only for determination of compensation. Consequently, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the UOI & SECL, adopted the aforesaid arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the State.

6. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents.

7. Section 3 of the CBA Act, 1957 provides for appointment of competent authority. The same reads as under:

3. Appointment of competent authority - The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint any person to be the competent authority for the purposes of this Act; and different persons may be appoint