SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(P&H) 523

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
RAJIV SOOD - Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR – Respondent
CWP-11951-2021 (O&M)
Decided On : 07-07-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. C.L.Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Kanika Sachdeva, AAG, Punjab

The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 provides specific procedures for re-determination of compensation, and the court's writ jurisdiction is limited by the scope of the Act.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act - Compensation - Sections 18, 28A

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought enhanced compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, without availing the opportunities provided under Sections 18 and 28A for re-determination of compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner's failure to avail the opportunities under the Act precluded the issuance of a writ for enhanced compensation.

Issues: Failure to seek reference under Sections 18 and 28A, reliance on Supreme Court judgment, and the scope of writ jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: The Act provided sufficient opportunities for re-determination of compensation, and the court cannot exercise writ jurisdiction beyond the scope of the Act.

Final Decision: The petition for enhanced compensation was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.

2. The petitioner herein prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant enhanced compensation for the land measuring 9 kanals 10 marlas situated in village Kotla Gaunspur, District Hoshiarpur, at par with other owners.

3. The aforesaid land was acquired as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide an award dated 25.11.2005.

4. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner neither sought reference under Section 18 nor applied under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1894').

5. No doubt, other identically situated land owners did file applications under Section 18 of the Act of 1894. Consequently, the Court re-determined and enhanced the market value of the acquired land. In appeal, the High Court further enhanced the amount.

6. As per the provisions of the Act of 1894, an owner whose land has been acquired is given two opportunities if he is not satisfied with the assessment of the market value of the land made by the Land Acquisition Collector. Firstly, if he has not accepted the award, he can file an application to the Land Acquisition Collector with a request to refer the matter to the Court for re-determination,. Section 18 of the Act of 1894, is extracted as under:-

    “18 Reference to Court.

(1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.

(2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken: Provided that every such application shall be made, (a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award;

(b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire.”

Secondly, those owners, who miss the opportunity to apply for reference under Section 18 of the Act of 1894 are granted another opportunity under Section 28-A of the Act of 1894, in order to mitigate their difficulties. The said provision is extracted as under:-

    Section 28A- Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court.

(1) Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under section 4, sub-section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court: Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this sub-section, the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded.

(2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub-section (1), conduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and make an award determining the amount of compensation payable to the applicants.

(3) Any person who has not accepted the award under su

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top