Back
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM: GANGTOK
BISWANATH SOMADDER, CJ., BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, J.
Karma Tshering Bhutia, S/o Shri Tempo Rapgay Bhutia – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim, Through the Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim and Ors. – Respondents
W.A. No. 07 of 2023
Decided On : 08-10-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. compensation claims and proceedings (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 2. misinterpretation of compensation as an award (Para 2 , 13 , 19) |
| 3. procedure for land acquisition under act of 1894 (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. legal requirements for awards under sections 11 and 17 (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. supreme court interpretation on compensation and awards (Para 20 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. final decision to allow writ petition no. 32 of 2018 (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.
The impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 10.07.2023, disposing two connected writ petitions, was primarily on the opinion that the statement of compensation computed on 31.05.2013 was not an award and the State respondents had failed to explain the law under which compensation was computed and prepared.
2. The impugned judgment holding that the statement of compensation computed on 31.05.2013 was in fact the award, is based on the premise that there was no provision in the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (for short, Act of 1894) under which such statements of compensation which had all the trappings of an award could be computed. This was incorrect. The relevant provision was not examined as it was not placed by the parties. We are, therefore, constrained to interfere with the impugned judgment for reasons stated below.
3. Writ Petition (C) no. 32 of 2018 preferred by Karma Tshering Bhutia (the appellant herein) was dismissed and Writ Petition (C) 43 of 2022 preferred by College of Agriculture Engineering and Post Harvest Technology (for short, CAEPHT) (the respondent no.4 herein), was allowed.
4. The appellant had prayed for release of compensation amount as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, Act of 2013); payment of interest at 10% per annum on balance compensation amount unpaid until final payment; and for rehabilitation and resettlement of the appellant and his family members who were displaced.
5. CAEPHT in their writ petition had prayed for quashing of memo no. 1748/LR & DMD/GOS/ACQ/317- 318 dated 12.08.2017; memo no.1748/LR & DMD/ACQ/GOS/418 dated 20.09.2017; and memo no. 1748/LR & DMD/2018/681 dated “Nil” 2018. These memos were issued by the respondent no.3 forwarding rectified details of compensation to CAEPHT.
6. Both the writ petitions arose from an acquisition proceeding under the Act of 1894.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned senior counsel for the CAEPHT and the learned Additional Advocate General for the State respondents.
8. The admitted facts reflect:
| Date | Events |
22.08.2008 29.11.2008 10.06.2009 | CAEPHT requested the State for additional land in Ranipool. |
| 12.09.2012 | CAEPHT sought administrative clarification regarding purchase of land and the correct procedure to be followed for purchase of land from willing local persons. |
| 05.09.2012 | Karma Tshering Bhutia offered his land for sale to CAEPHT. |
| 18.05.2013 | Preliminary notification under Section 4 was issued notifying the land of Karma Tshering Bhutia being needed for public purpose invoking urgency clause under Section 17 of the Act of 1894. |
| 31.05.2013 | Statement of compensation for land and other standing properties as assessed by respondent no.2 was forwarded to the respondent no.4 requesting for release of 80% advance payment for making payment to land owners. |
| 03.08.2013 | The declaration under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 was published. |
| 01.11.2013 | The respondent no.3 conveyed to respondent no.2 the government’s approval under Section 7 of the Act of 1894 for the construction of the Central Agricultural University by respondent no.4 requesting respondent no.2 to proceed as per Act of 1894. |
| 25.11.2013 | Public notice under Section 9 of the Act of 1894 published calling upon interested persons to appear personally or by agent before the respondent no.2 on or before 12.12.2013 and state in writing the nature of their respective interest in the land and the amount in particular |
Compensation in land acquisition must adhere to statutory requirements, including formal awards under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, or provisions of the updated Act of 2013 apply.
No lapse of proceedings under the Act of 1894 occurs if compensation has been paid and possession of the acquired land has been assumed, even if no award has been made.
Compliance with Section 17(3-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is mandatory for absolute vesting of the notified land, and the requirement to pass the award within the time frame contemplated unde....
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
Section 24 of the Right to Compensation Act does not apply to acquisitions initiated under the West Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act; subsequent purchasers can only claim compensation based on ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acquisition proceedings lapsed as no award was made within 2 years of the declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act, and the State was d....
Failure to pay 80% compensation under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act invalidates acquisition proceedings, necessitating a fresh award based on market value.
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
