The entitlement to annuity benefits under a government policy is an integral part of an acquisition award, and the time limit for claiming such benefits is directory in nature. Additionally, if the State causes delays in compensation disbursal through misleading procedures, it must pay statutory interest under Section 34.

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

By way of present writ petition, the short prayer made on behalf of the petitioner/landowner is for release of statutory interest in his favour on account of delayed disbursal of the amount of compensation, besides award of annuity benefits to him in accordance with the award dated 04.07.2014 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate Department, Rohtak, (for short ‘the LAC’).

Briefly stating, some land owned by the petitioner, situated within the revenue estate of Village Jhajjar, District Jhajjar was acquired vide notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) respectively, for the public purpose namely, for development of Institutional and partly Commercial, road widening and green belt of Sector 10, Jhajjar. Award under Section 11 of the Act was announced on 04.07.2014, thereby determining the market value of the land besides awarding annuity scheme benefits @ Rs.21,000/- per acre per annum for a period of 33 years in accordance with the government gazette notification dated 09.11.2010. The relevant para 4 of the award is extracted hereunder:-

“4. MARKET VALUE:-

The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Jhajjar was requested to supply the market value of land under acquisition. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Jhajjar supplied the market value of the land under acquisition as per provisions of LARR Act-2013 vide his memo No. DRA/628-34 dt. 17.06.2014 as Rs. 30 Lacs per acre for all kinds of land and after that rate identify vide order dt. 01.07.2014 of the P.S.U.E 28,13,951/- per acre for all kinds of land. As per section 26(2) of LARR Act-2013, the awarded market value shall be multiplied by a factor to be specified in the first scheduled. But so far the govt. has notified the factor, as such after notification by the government, the difference of compensation is applicable, shall be awarded.

I have inspected the land under acquisition along with the revenue staff of my office before announcement of the Award. Keeping in view the location, situation and all other factors, I observe that the market value, i.e. 28,13,951/- per acre for all kinds of land, supplied by the P.S.U.E, Haryana are fair and adequate, and I award the same alongwith the Annuity Scheme of 21,000/- per acre per annum for a period of 33 years, published vide government gazette dated 9-11.2010 which will be increased by a fixed sum of Rs. 750/- per acre every year.”

In the award, the petitioner/landowner was also recorded to be entitled for the benefits of Land Pooling Scheme. Clause 8 of the Award in this regard is extracted hereunder:-

“8. LAND POOLING SCHEME:- The landowner(s) opting for the Land Pooling Scheme will be provided developed residential site in the form of residential plots measuring 1000 sq. yards and commercial site measuring 100 sq. yards against each one acre of land acquired in lieu of the compensation package and all the benefits admissible under the R & R Policy’ of the Government, at the time of first floatation of the residential sector for which land of the applicant has been acquired:

The landowner(s) would be eligible to participate in the Land Pooling Scheme only if a minimum of 1000 sq yards or more of his/their land is acquired. The details of the land pooling scheme are given in the Haryana Govt. Urban Estate Department notification dt. 10 Spt. 2012.”

Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the award dated 04.07.2014, the petitioner submitted application before the LAC for seeking benefit of Land Pooling Scheme and the same remained pending consideration; whereas on the other hand, the possession of the acquired land was taken over by the respondents on the date of passing of the Award itself. He points out that compensation in terms of the aforementioned award was neither released in favour of the petitioner/landowner at the time of passing of the award nor even when the possession