IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2630 of 2000 GOPAL SINGH @SHANKER KR,SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 5. 21.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner prays for payment of interest on the amount of compensation given to the original petitioner Baliram Singh in 1995 for damage caused in the year 1975 and further for quashing the order dated 23.8.1999 passed by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar rejecting the prayer for interest on the compensation amount as made by the original petitioner in his representation filed in accordance with the direction of this Court given in its order dated 19.3.1998 passed in C.W.J.C. No.3914 of 1996. The short facts of this case are that the original petitioner was issued a notice on 25.8.1975 by the District Magistrate, Aurangabad during the period when the proclamation of emergency was in operation directing him to remove the encroachment from the land pertaining to Khata No. 138, Plot No.15 area 8.30 acres, which is the raiyati land of the petitioner over which he had constructed a house. Against the said notice, the said petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ application and stay was granted by this Court. However, ignoring the same and taking undue advantage of the state of emergency, the District Magistrate, Aurangabad demolished the house of the petitioner. By order dated 5.11.1976, the writ petition was disposed of and the notice in 2 question was quashed. After the proclamation of emergency was withdrawn, the Shah Commission of enquiry had been set up to look into the highhandedness committed during that period by the Government officials. The original petitioner made an application on 22.7.1977 before the Shah Commission claiming compensation of Rs. 30,000/- for the injury caused to him by Respondent No.8 and other officials and also for necessary action against them. The Shah Commission after enquiry found the Government Officials guilty and recommended the matter to the Government of Bihar for necessary action. Thereafter, the said petitioner moved before the Government. The State Government had also set up a Sinha Commission of Enquiry to enquire into the matter of highhandedness committed by the officials during the emergency and the petitioner also preferred a complaint on 30.1.1979, which was sent to the Commission by the concerned authorities for taking necessary action on the basis of the recommendation of Shah Commission. Thereafter, he filed several representations, but no action having been taken, he approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No.3156 of 1992, which was disposed of by order dated 6.8.1993 directing the Chief Secretary to consider the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of the same by a reasoned order. No action being taken by the authorities, the petitioner filed a contempt application being M.J.C. No.497 of 1994 and during the pendency of the same, the District Magistrate, Aurangabad paid Rs. 30,000/- as compensation to the original petitioner through Bill No.206 dated 2.9.1995. On the said payment being made, the contempt application 3 was dismissed. It is pointed out that in the said representation dated 4.11.1993 the petitioner had duly stated that the amount of compensation of Rs. 30,000/- was claimed by him 18 years earlier of which the recent value is Rupees Two Lacs and he had accordingly, claimed interest from 1975 till the date of payment of compensation and also cost of litigation. On the interest not having been paid and no reasoned order having been passed, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No.3914 of 1996, which was disposed of by order dated 19.3.1998 with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation and with a further direction to the Chief Secretary to pass a reasoned order with respect to the same within two months from the date of filing of the same. Accordingly, the representation was filed by the original petitioner, which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 23.8.1999 by the Chief Secretary. The reason for rejection given in the impugned order is that the petitioner has started claiming interest on the compensation amount of Rs. 30,000/- only after the said amount had been paid to him and thus the claim of interest put by the petitioner is an after thought after the amount of compensation has already been paid to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned passed by the Chief Secretary is non est and based upon mistake of facts. Learned counsel contends that even prior to payment of the amount, the petitioner had in his representation dated 4.11.1993 clearly raised the claim for interest since the payment of compensation 4 had not been made till 18 years after the damage was caused illegally by the officials of the Government of Bihar. It is, thus, stated that the Chief Secretary has wrongly considered the entire matter by holding that the claim of interest is an after thought and has been raised for the first time after the compensation amount has already been paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State is unable to meet the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner in view of the clear materials on the record which falsify the reasons contained in the impugned order passed by the Chief Secretary. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the impugned order dated 23.8.1999 passed by the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar cannot stand and it is, accordingly, quashed. This Court would have ordinarily remitted the matter back to the Chief Secretary for a fresh consideration and disposal of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. However, considering the fact that wrong has been committed by the State authorities as far back as in the year 1975 and his claim has been upheld by the Shah Commission in the year 1978 and even thereafter the State- respondents took 17 years to pay the compensation amount claimed by the original petitioner and that he had to repeatedly approach this Court, I am of the view that the original petitioner was entitled to be compensated for the gross delay caused in making payment to him for demolition of his house, which was in complete violation of his legal rights under the cover of the proclamation of emergency. The authorities concerned are, accordingly, directed to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum within a period of three 5 months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order on the delayed payment of compensation to the petitioner from the date of demolition of his house till 2.9.1995 when the compensation amount was paid to him. The writ application is, accordingly, allowed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.)