Saharanpur Landowners’ Compensation Must Be Reworked Using January 1, 2014 Valuation Date, As No Award Was Made: Allahabad HC

In brief

The question

1. Whether the date for determining compensation for the acquired land should be 12 June 2004, the date of the Section 28 notification, or 1 January 2014, the date the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force, where no award had been made by then.

The court held

The Court did not declare the acquisition lapsed.

It also directed

It directed the State respondents to redetermine compensation for plots Nos. 59, 60/1 and 60/2 in accordance with the 2013 Act and Hem Chandra within three months of production of a certified copy of the order, and to distribute the admissible amount within two months of quantification.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

01Facts

The U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad acquired the petitioners’ plots—Nos. 59, 60/1 and 60/2 in Village Mavi Khurd—under notifications issued under Sections 28 and 32 of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, dated 12 June 2004 and 7 August 2010, respectively.

¶ 3

By the time of the petition, no award had been made.

¶ 3

Although the Parishad had deposited the assessed compensation with the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO), that assessment used 12 June 2004 as the reference date.

¶ 3, 9

The petitioners sought, among other relief, a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed and protection of their possession.

¶ 2

02Issues

i.1. Whether the date for determining compensation for the acquired land should be 12 June 2004, the date of the Section 28 notification, or 1 January 2014, the date the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force, where no award had been made by then.

¶ 10

ii.2. Whether the acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act because no award had been made.

¶ 11(i), 12

03Law Applied

The Court applied the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, under which the acquisition notifications were issued, and considered Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

¶ 11(i)–(ii), 12–13

Following Hem Chandra v. State of U.P., as well as M/s Bir Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., the Court held that an acquisition under the Adhiniyam does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act; however, where the award had not been made by 1 January 2014, compensation must be determined under the 2013 Act using that date as the reference date, with applicable statutory additions.

¶ 11(i)–(ii), 12–13

The Court noted that the Supreme Court had dismissed the special leave petition challenging Hem Chandra.

¶ 4, 11(i)

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 24

04Reasoning

No award had been made for the petitioners’ land, and the compensation assessment based on the 2004 notification was therefore inconsistent with the rule in Hem Chandra.

¶ 9, 13

Applying that rule, the Court concluded that the acquisition did not lapse, but the compensation had to be redetermined under the 2013 Act with 1 January 2014 as the reference date and with applicable statutory additions.

¶ 12–13