IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mr. Mohammad Rafiq and Mr. Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ.
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation Of India Limited - Appellant
Versus
Veenaphalke - Respondent
Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 817 of 2018 With D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 11352 of 2018 In S.B. Civil Writ petition No.7602 of 2018
Decided On : 25-09-2018
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 105, 113 and 51 – Freight Corridor Corporation – Fair Compensation – Arbitrator – Appeal has been preferred by three appellants Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Limited through its Managing Director, (2) Executive Director Railway Board New Delhi and (3) Railway Board through its Chairman, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi, assailing judgment whereby learned Single Judge partly allowed the writ petition filed by respondents. The learned Single Judge, while partly allowing writ petition, quashed notice issued by Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Ajmer, to the petitioners-respondents under Section 20-I of the Railways Act, 2008, to take possession of acquired land, with the liberty to issue fresh notice of sixty days and then undertake the exercise of rehabilitation and resettlement benefits in terms of Second Schedule of Entitlement Matrix effective – Held, Learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of appellants, was asked by Court to give a reasonable offer for amicable resolution of dispute fair enough to offer deposit of respect of respondents are not willing to accept amount of which is amount payable in case of reluctance to receive the house by way of rehabilitation submitted that amount being double of that amount would be adequate and reasonable to safeguard interests of respondent further submission is that this judgment should not be made precedent for future cases, land acquisition proceedings in respect of thousands of persons falling on Delhi-Mumbai Dedicated Freight Corridor have become final and possession of land already been taken If this is not made so specifically clear in this judgment landholders in many cases might again resort to litigation claiming similar benefits and many cleared cases would get reopened – Appeal is disposed.
JUDGMENT
Mohammad Rafiq, J. - This appeal has been preferred by three appellants, namely, (1) Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Limited through its Managing Director, (2) Executive Director (Land Amenities-1), Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi and (3) Railway Board through its Chairman, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi, assailing the judgment dated 09.05.2018 whereby the learned Single Judge partly allowed the writ petition filed by respondents. The learned Single Judge, while partly allowing the writ petition, quashed the notice dated 28.03.2018 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Ajmer, to the petitioners-respondents under Section 20-I of the Railways (Amendment) Act, 2008, to take the possession of the acquired land, with the liberty to issue fresh notice of sixty days and then undertake the exercise of rehabilitation and resettlement benefits in terms of the Second Schedule of the Entitlement Matrix, 2015, effective from 01st January, 2015, which was adopted by the Railways under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'the Act of 2013').
2. Earlier the notification dated 11.08.2009, published in daily newspaper 'Dainik Navjyoti' on 07.09.2009, was issued by the Railway Board, New Delhi, declaring the intention of the Central Government to acquire the land notified therein in exercise of section 20A(1) of the Railways Act, 1989, which was required for execution, implementation and management of the Special Railway Project, namely, Western Dedicated Freight Corridor in Ajmer, from Delhi to Mumbai for accelerating the railways transportation. The declaration under section 20E of the Railways Act, 1989, was then issued on 01.06.2010 by the Government declaring that the land mentioned therein shall be acquired for the purpose of DFCCIL and as per section 20E(2) of the Railways Act, 1989, the said land shall vest with the Central Government free from all encumbrances. The award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority on 14.07.2011. This award sought to acquire even certain parcels of such land which were not included in the Notification under section 20A and 20E of the Railways Act, 1989. The affected persons filed writ petition, being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8961/2014, before this Court. This Court vide judgment dated 29.01.2015, while upholding the acquisition in respect of other lands, quashed the above category of lands with the liberty to the Railways to initiate fresh land acquisition proceedings. The Railways thereafter issued fresh Notification under section 20A of the Railways Act, 1989, on 06.06.2016, which was published in the daily newspapers on 20.06.2016. After deciding the objections, the declaration under section 20A of the Railways Act, 1989, was issued on 12.01.2017 which was published in the official Gazette on 26.01.2017. The claims of compensation were then invited by the Sub Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer.
3. In the meantime, the Act of 2013 was enacted. Section 105(3) of the Act of 2013 provided that the Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of the Act of 2013, i.e., 01.01.2014, direct that any of the provisions of the Act of 2013 relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and the Third Schedules being beneficial to the affected families, shall apply to the cases of land acquisition under the enactment specified in the Fourth Schedule or shall apply with such exceptions or modifications that do not reduce the compensation or dilute the provisions of this Act relating to compensation or rehabilitation and resettlement as may be specified in the notification, as the case may be. It is not in dispute that the Fourth Schedule also includes the Railways Act, 1989, at its Serial No.13. The Centra
Devsharan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Darius Shapur Chenai
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.