Under the RFCT-LARR Act, rehabilitation benefits depend on familial dependency; children can inherit rights but must prove independence from the family structure established post-remarriage to qualify as an affected family.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 & 2 and Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for State respondent no.3.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed for a direction commanding the respondents to forthwith declare the award under Section 31 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act , 2013[RFCT-LARR Act, 2013], in accordance with the Second Schedule and provide the entitlements to the petitioners within some stipulated time.

FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

3. The facts leading to this petition are that the petitioners’ father namely Sunil Kumar was owner of 1/4th share in land bearing Khasra No.690/3 situated at Village Jadauda, Tehsil Sadar, District Muzaffar Nagar. He died in the year 2003, leaving behind his widow Smt. Savita and the petitioners as his legal heirs. The petitioners were minor at the time of death of their father. Later on, the mother of the petitioners re- married to Anil Kumar, leaving behind the minor children in the custody of their grandparents.

4. On 16.01.2015, a notification was issued under Section 20-A of the Railways Act , 1989[Act, 1989] by the Ministry of Railways, notifying its intention to acquire the land specified in the notification including the petitioners’ land in Khasra No.690/3 for the public purpose of construction of the “Special Rail Project Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor[DFC]” and the same was published in local newspapers on 03.03.2015. Subsequently, the declaration under Section 20-E of the Act, 1989 was made on 21.12.2015 and the same was published in the newspapers on 15.01.2016. Again the Ministry of Railways had acquired the land of the petitioners by issuing a notification dated 18.04.2016 and declaration was made on 28.12.2016, which was also published in the newspapers on 04.05.2016 and 22.01.2017 respectively. Consequently, the Competent Authority had determined the amount payable as compensation under Section 20-F of the Act, 1989 and declared the awards on 30.07.2016 and thereafter on 26.12.2017 under Section 3 0 of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013. The physical possession of the petitioners’ land was also taken by the respondent no.2.

5. In exercise of powers under Section 105 (3) of the RFCT-LARR Act, 2013, the Central Government had issued the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015[Order, 2015] on 28.08.2015, which reads as under:-

“1. (1) This Order may be called the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015.

(2) It shall come into force with effect from the 1st day of September, 2015.

2. The provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act , 2013, relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act.”

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS

6. Shri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioners, referring to the Order, 2015, submitted that for any award declared on or after 01.09.2015, the amount payable as compensation is to be determined by the Competent Authority in accordance with the provisions of the RFCT- LARR Act, 2