1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 1054/2008 (Isharnath and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) ......... Date of Order : 17/10/2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Sudhir Sharma for the petitioners. Mr. K.L.Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State. Mr. P.P.Chaudhary for the respondent No.3. BY THE COURT After having heard the matter finally, the counsel for the parties by an application being I.A. No.14301/08 and 14359/08 submit that the writ petition may be disposed of in view of the “Compromise Agreement” and “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” entered into by the petitioner and the respondent No.3 M/s V.S.Lignite Power Pvt. Ltd. in respect of the acquisition of land which is subject matter of the instant writ petition. The land in question is situated in village Gurha, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) for 2 acquisition of the land for public purpose for setting up Lignite based Electricity Generation Power Plant, was issued. The notification under Section 6 r/w Section 17 (4) of the Act was also published after following due process of law. The award has been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and as per the direction of the Land Acquisition Officer, the amount of compensation as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer has already been deposited by the respondent No.3 company with the authorised officer of the respondent State and the possession of the land has already been handed over long back to the respondent company. However, the acquisition proceedings came to be challenged by way of instant writ petition by the petitioners who are recorded Khatedar (s)/ interested person (s). During pendency of the writ petition, the petitioners and the respondent company have mutually agreed to enter into a compromise in order to settle the dispute in respect of the land in question mentioned in the compromise which is subject matter of the acquisition through a “Compromise Agreement” annexed with application being I.A. No.14301/08 as Annex.A/1. By the said compromise agreement the respondent company voluntarily agreed to enhance the compensation in addition to what has been deposited by the company and accepted by the petitioners and the respondent company is prepared to deposit the enhanced differential compensation with the Land Acquisition 3 Officer as per the directions of this Court and the petitioner/ interested person(s) would be free to withdraw the same. The petitioners undertake to surrender all the original title documents that are in their possession relating to the land in question. On receipt of the enhanced differential compensation under the agreement, the petitioners shall have no right, possession, lien, title on the land and shall not dispute the acquisition of the land, compensation awarded and quantum of compensation. The petitioners also agree that they have no grievance with the process followed by the respondents for acquisition of the land which was acquired by respondent State for the respondent company and the petitioners' claim through this writ petition was only to the extent of enhancement of compensation. The Compromise Agreement has been entered into on 26th September, 2008 between the petitioners and the respondent No.3 company. The petitioners and the respondent company have also mutually agreed to enter into another compromise in order to settle the dispute in respect of the part of the land in question mentioned in the “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” which is subject matter of the acquisition through a “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” annexed with application being I.A. No. 14359/08 as Annex.A/1 since the applicant company is not in immediate need of the land of the 4 petitioners at this stage mentioned in the “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition”. As per the agreement for De-acquisition, the compensation for acquisition of land as determined by the Land Acquisition Officer by an award which have been deposited by the respondent company with the Land Acquisition Officer shall be refunded to the company and the petitioners shall have no right to that amount since there is de-acquisition of the land and the land shown in the “Compromise Agreement for De- acquisition” will be restored to the petitioners. Since the parties have settled the dispute by the “Compromise Agreement” Annex.A/1 annexed with IA No.14301/08 and “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” (Annex.A/1) annexed with I.A. No.14359/08 and therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives in the writ petition and the same may be disposed of in terms of the “Compromise Agreement” Annex.A/1 and “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” annexed with the applications. The writ petition is therefore, disposed of in terms of the “Compromise Agreement” (Annex.A/1) annexed with the application being I.A. No.14301/08 and “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” (Annex.A/1 annexed with application being I.A. No. 14359/08. Both the documents i.e. “Compromise Agreement” (Annex.A/1) and “Compromise Agreement for De- 5 acquisition” (Annex.A/1) are made Rule of the Court and shall form the part of this order. The respondent company shall deposit the enhanced differential compensation in respect of the land in question mentioned in “Compromise Agreement” Annex.A/1 with the Land Acquisition Officer within a period of four weeks and the petitioner/ interested persons would be free to withdraw the same. So far as the land mentioned in “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” Annex.A/1 is concerned, the respondent No.2 Land Acquisition Officer shall refund the amount deposited by the respondent No.3 company as per the award made by it in the acquisition proceeding forthwith and on such refund, the possession of the land in question will be restored to the petitioners and the land in question mentioned in “Compromise Agreement for De-acquisition” (Annex.A/1) shall stand recorded in the name of the petitioners. The Applications being I.A. No. 14301/08 and 14359/08 stand disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp 6 S.B.CIVIL MISC. STAY PETITION NO. 1715/2008 IN S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1054/08 Date of Order : 17/10/2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Sudhir Sharma for the petitioner. Mr. K.L.Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State. Mr. P.P.Choudhary for the respondent No.3. Since the writ petition itself has been disposed of, the stay petition also stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp