Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
DEVIODER GUPTA,D.P.SOOD
GEETA VIDYA PITH, PALAMPUR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Respondent
C. W. P. No. 547 of 1988
Decided On : 06/04/1991
LAND ACQUISITION - PROPERTY DEPRIVATION - COMPENSATION - RESTORATION OF POSSESSION - ACQUIESCENCE - USE AND OCCUPATION CHARGES - LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA:
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner Society, registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, purchased property for educational purposes. The property was taken over by the State Government in 1978 without following due process or paying compensation. The Society challenged the takeover and sought restoration of possession and damages for use and occupation.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the takeover of the property was illegal and unauthorized as it was based on an invalid resolution. The Court found that the Society had acquiesced in the State Government's possession of the property by passing a resolution allowing its use for an Ayurvedic College subject to settlement of terms, but that this did not disentitle them from claiming compensation.
Issues: 1. Whether the takeover of the property by the State Government was legal and authorized. 2. Whether the Society was entitled to restoration of possession of the property. 3. Whether the Society was entitled to compensation for use and occupation of the property.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the takeover of the property was illegal and unauthorized as it was based on an invalid resolution. The Court found that the Society had acquiesced in the State Government's possession of the property by passing a resolution allowing its use for an Ayurvedic College subject to settlement of terms, but that this did not disentitle them from claiming compensation. 2. The Court held that the Society was not entitled to restoration of possession of the property as they had acquiesced in the State Government's possession and allowed them to develop the property. 3. The Court held that the Society was entitled to compensation for use and occupation of the property, but that this would be subsumed within the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Final Decision: The Court partly allowed the Writ Petition and directed the State Government to initiate appropriate proceedings for acquisition of the property in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court also directed the State Government to pay compensation to the Society along with solatium and interest in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
Devinder Gupta, J.—Petitioner No. 1 is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, i860 (Act No. 21 of 1860). Petitioner No. 2 is its President and petitioner No 3 a Member of its governing body. They have filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 read with Article 111 of the Constitution of India seeking directions against the respondents for restoring property of petitioner No 1 to it and to pay damages/use and occupation charges w. e. f. 29th April, 1978 onwards.
2. Petitioner No. 1-Society was registered on 25th May, 1971. Annexure P-1 is the certificate of registration. The aims and objects of the Society as contained in its bye-laws Annexure P-5 are as follows :—- (i) To make the youths self sufficient by propagating amongst them the philosophy of Kararn Yoga of Shree Gecta. (ii) To take the people of the country/State on the path of progress by propagating amongst them to spirit of performing their duties selflessly as propounded in Shree Geeta. (iii) The cause of prevailing unemployment in the country and the State is to forget the overlook the philosophy of Shree Geeta. Therefore, it is necessary to awaken the people and to show them the path of Karatn Yoga* to remove unemployment.
3. The Society through a deed of sale Annexure P-3 dated 23rd November, 1973 purchased property situate within the revenue estate Chimbaldwar (Rani Sidhpur), Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra to the extent of 0-33-8! Hectares for a consideration of Rs 8,000. Till the month of July/August, 1979, it had with its own funds raised a huge construction thereupon consisting of 22 rooms inclusive of 4 big halls. A School with two wings by the name of Bhartendu Mahavidayalaya was being run in a part of the said building for imparting higher education in Hindi and Sanskrit. Later on, third wing was also added to it for imparting education in Ayurvedic system of medicines and to prepare students for Ayurvedacharya. The School was affiliated to Hindi Sahitya Samelan, Allahabad for the purpose of awarding degrees/certificates. Petitioner No. 3 being founder of the Society and qualified in Ayurveda was appointed as Principal and Head of Ayurveda Wing It is further the case of the petitioners that when during emergency in the year 1976-77, the management of Ayurveda Wing as well as that of the Society became disorganised due to the arrest of petitioners No. 2 and 3, the Police took over the records of Ayurveda Wing as well as of the Society and certain persons tried to encroach upon its property. The possession of the property is also stated to have been taken by the respondents on 10th October, 1976 on the basis of a resolution of the same day (Annexure R-l), alleged to have been passed by Shri Parkash Chand Kudesha and Gurmukh Singh Bedi, for which they had no authority on behalf of petitioner No.1.
4. After the respondents took over possession of the property, Annexure P-6 Notification was issued on 7/8th September, 1977 by respondent No. 1 ordering the superseding of the Managing Committee and appointing Deputy Commissioner, Kangra as its Administrator to run the Institution under its direction of which information was given to the Secretary of petitioner No. 1 Ayurvedic College on 9th September, 1V77 vide letter Annexure P-7. On the same day, Managing Committee of petitioner No. 1 met and passed Resolution Annexure P~8 objecting to the decision of respondent No. 1, inter alia, in the following words : ~~ "It is revealed from the letter received by the Secretary that the Govt. has appointed D. C. as Administrator after dissolving the management Committee of the Ayurvedic College. It is a hard blow to the developing Sanstha if this action is meant only for taking possession and not for adopting the College by the Govt. This step of the Govt is undemocratic and in violation of the registered constitution of the Sanstha, which vehemeotiy condemned unanimously. Therefore, the Govt. should immediately hand over the possession of the Co
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
