Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 59394
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Devan Ramachandran, J
M.ABOOBACKER – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3562 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 3267 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 13984 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 13936 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH, ABDUL RASAK A., ASWIN KUMAR M J, HELEN P.A, ARUN ROY, SHAHIR SHOWKATH ALI
For the Respondents: SMT.MINI GOPINATH, CGC, SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN, SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASGI, SMT. RESMI THOMAS - GP, SRI. BIDAN CHANDRAN - SC
Land valuators must consider current property conditions over outdated classifications for fair compensation under law.
Headnote:(A) National Highways Act - Section 3-D - Land Acquisition - Petitioners contend that properties classified as "Wet lands" in Revenue Records are unfairly assessed for compensation - They challenge the reliance on outdated records versus current property value leading to incorrect compensation determinations. (Paras 1-30)
(B) Legal Principle - Right to Fair Compensation - Petitioners argue for compensation based on current land value as per provisions of RFCTLARR Act and maintaining the principle that the CALA should evaluate land based on its real-time attributes and market value rather than solely on older records. (Paras 24-30)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners claim their lands are wrongly classified as "Wet lands" and fear reduced compensation due to outdated records. They challenge a Government Order that limits land value assessment to these records. (Paras 1-8)
Findings of Court:
CALA is mandated to determine compensation under current law by considering present land characteristics, not just Revenue Records. (Paras 27-29)
Issues: Whether CALA can classify land value based on present attributes regardless of old records; challenge to Government Order restricting assessment methods. (Paras 18-20)
Ratio Decidendi: CALA holds jurisdiction to assess current land value for compensation independent of historical classifications while having powers akin to a Civil Court. The Government Order does not fetter this jurisdiction. (Paras 24-30)
Result: Writ Petitions are ordered.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discrepancy in property classification impacts compensation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. government order's impact on compensation assessment. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. cala's powers to assess current land value. (Para 10 , 12 , 18) |
| 4. market value assessment criteria under nh act. (Para 24 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. petitioners must approach cala for fair assessment. (Para 31 , 32) |
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.3562/2021, 3267/2021, 13984/2021, 13936/2021]
It is very ubiquitous in our State that the nature and attributes of properties are at variance from the entries relating to it in the Basic Tax Register (BTR) and such other Revenue Records; and this has created the controversy presented in these cases.
2. The properties of the petitioners in the above Writ Petitions are described as “Wet lands” in the Basic Tax Register (BTR), but are stated to be far from such attributes presently.
3. The petitioners assert that their lands have remained with all the features of a “Garden/Dry Land” even prior to the year 2008, when the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land, Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Paddy Land Act” for ease), was brought into force and that this is incontestable since they are not included in the “Data Bank”, prepared under its sanction.
4. While so, it transpires that the lands in question in these cases were acquired for the purposes of the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) and when the final notification under Section 3-D of the National Highways Act , (“NH Act” for short) was issued, they have been described as “Wet lands”, adopting the entries in the BTR.
5. The petitioners thus apprehend that, solely because their lands are shown as “Wet lands”, the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) will grant them lower compensation than their real present value.
6. The petitioners predicate that the 'CALA' has illogically accepted the entries in the 'BTR', solely because the Government of India, through its order dated 14th August, 2020 – a copy of which is appended as Ext.P16 in W.P.(C)No.3267 of 2021 (hereinafter referred to as the “GOI Order” for convenience) – has mandated that the value of a land can only be assessed on the basis of its Revenue Records.
7. The petitioners contend that the above mentioned order of the Government of India is illegal, because the 'CALA' is enjoined to act implicitly as per the provisions of the applicable Statutes and Regulations; and its statutory jurisdiction and competence cannot be fettered or interdicted by any Authority, in the manner as has been done through this order.
8. The petitioners, therefore, pray that Ext.P16 order in W.P.(C)No.3267/2021, as also the Notification issued under Section 3D of the 'NH Act', to the extent to which it relates to their acquired lands, be set aside; and the 'CALA' be directed to assess the value of their properties in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act , 2013 (RFCTLARR Act), taking its present physical state and attributes alone into consideration and not as per its description in the BTR.
9. I have heard Sri.Mohammed Shah - the learned counsel for the petitioners in all these cases; Sri.Bidan Chandran - learned Standing Counsel for the NHAI and Smt.Resmi Thomas - learned Government Pleader appearing for the other respondents.
10. Smt.Resmi Thomas confirmed that the notification under Section 3-D of the NH Act, with respect to the properties in question, has already been published; and thus asserted that this writ petition is, therefore, not maintainable, because once the said notification had been so issued, the petitioners cannot challenge it, on account of the statutory bar under Section 3-D (4) of the NH Act; and that it is now for them to approach the 'CALA' and establish the value of their properties, if they are so interested.
11. The learned Government Pleader, maintained that, as far as the tenor and description of the properties are concerned, only the Revenue
