Case: Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. & Another Vs. Mathias Oram & Others

1. Vide notification dated 11.02.1987 issued under Section 4(1) of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (in short "the Act), the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in Revenue Village Gopalpur, District Sundergarh, Orissa. This was followed by Notification dated 27.07.1987 under Section 7(1) giving notice of intention to acquire the notified land. Finally, Section 9 notification dated 10.07.1989 was issued by which the notified lands got vested in the Central Government. Vide notification dated 20.03.1993 issued under Section 11 of the Act, all rights in the acquired lands were vested in the Mahanadi Coal Field Ltd., appellant herein w.e.f 17.11.1991. The affected land owners claimed compensation and rehabilitation and finally moved the High Court of Orissa by way of W.P.(C) No.11463/2003 which was disposed of on 13.11.2006 titled "Mathias Oram & Ors. v. Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. & Anr." which is the impugned judgment.2. When the matter came up for hearing before this Court on 19.07.2010, former Judge of the Orissa High Court, Justice A.K. Parichha was appointed as Chairman of the Commission along with two other officers to examine the claims of the affected parties and also to go into other related aspects.3. The scheme was proposed by the Amicus Curaie and was accepted by this Court in (2010) 11 SCC 269 as follows:- "22. The scheme proposed by Mr. Subramanium and agreed upon by the Central Government and the Coal Company is as follows:-1. The land in Village Gopalpur, District Sundergarh, Orissa stands acquired by the Central Government and ownership is vested with MCL, which will determine and pay compensation to the erstwhile landowners.2. In respect of vast portions of the acquired land (excluding the area where mining activities are being undertaken), actual physical possession was never taken. The State of Orissa and its officers are directed to assist MCL in taking actual physical possession of the acquired land.3. Since the matter pertains to an acquisition of 1987 i.e. more than two decades ago, the extent of actual physical possession needs to be re-ascertained, it is necessary that the genuine landowners, amount of compensation payable, status of possession, use to which the land has been put in the last two decades, is discovered. The entire land needs to be surveyed again.4. In accordance with the advice of the learned Solicitor General, a Claims Commission needs to be set up with representatives of the Central Government as well as MCL. It is submitted that the Claims Commission will consist of 3 Members:-(a) A former Judge of the High Court of Orissa (Chairman);(b) An officer who has held a post/office equivalent to the rank of Secretary to the Government of India;(c) An officer to be nominated by Chairman, Coal India Ltd.The Claims Commission will carry out the exercise referred to above and submit a report on the compensation payable and the persons to whom it should be paid, within a period six months.5. The above-said report will be submitted to the Central Government, and upon formal approval by the Central Government, MCL will make payment within a further period of two months.6. Some portions of the land have been determined to be unsuitable for the Petitioner having regard to physical features (mining being impossible, area being heavily populated, etc.). The Claims Commission will examine whether possession of such portions has been taken over by the Petitioner. It would be open to the Claims Commission to recommend denotification/release of the said land from acquisition.7. In view of the special facts obtaining above, the Central Government may be permitted to de-notify the said land from the acquisition as a special case, since the land is not required and possession also was never taken.8. Even in the case of the de-notified land, suitable compensation, in appropriate cases, may have to be paid to the landowners. The Claims Commission may also give a report on this aspect of the matter.9. The learned Solicitor General has opined that such matters of uncertain acquisition or pending compensation claims lead to unnecessary social tensions and the Petitioner must act in a spirit of good governance. Upon examination of all the surrounding villages, in the light of the opinion of the learned Solicitor General, for the sake of uniformity as well as fairness, the above exercise would be carried out for the following villages as well:(i) Sardega(ii) Jhupurunga(iii) Ratansara(iv) Tikilipara(v) Siarmal(vi) Tumulia(vii) Karlikachhar(viii) Kulda(ix) Bankibahal(x) Balinga(xi) Garjanbahal(xii) Bangurkela(xiii) Kiripsira(xiv) Lalma R.F.It must be noted that in the case of Sardega and Tikilipara Villages, part-payment has already been made. Further, in the case of Bankibahal and Balinga Villages, full payment has already been made but possession has not been fully taken.10. The Petitioner and the Central Government shall assist in the establishment of the Commission including the provision of suitable infrastructure. The honorarium payable to the Commission may be determined by this Honble Court.11. This Order is being passed with the agreement of all parties and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. The said order shall not operate as a precedent."24. We nominate Mr. Justice A.K. Parichha, a former Judge of the High Court of Orissa as Chairman of the Commission. Mr. Solicitor General in consultation with the Secretary, Ministry of Coal, Government of India, shall nominate an officer who has held a post/office equivalent to the rank of Secretary to the Government of India as one of the members of the Commission within two weeks from today. Similarly, the Chairman, Coal India Ltd. shall nominate an officer as the other member of the Commission. Mr. Justice A.K. Parichha, shall be paid honorarium, equal to the monthly salary of a sitting High Court Judge and he shall be entitled to all other facilities as available to a sitting judge of the High Court. The officer nominated by Mr. Subramanium/Secretary, Ministry of Coal, Government of India, shall similarly be entitled to honorarium and other facilities available to a serving officer of his rank. All the expenses of the Commission shall be borne by Coal India Ltd.25. The Commission shall prepare its report as envisaged in the scheme, first in respect of the lands in village Gopalpur, District Sundergarh, Orissa, as soon as possible and in any event not later than four months from today. In case the Commission recommends de-notification/release of any portion of the lands earlier acquired, it would also determine the rate or the amount of compensation/mesne profit payable to the land holder. The Commission shall submit its report not to the Central Government but to this Court for approval and further directions. Any de-notification/release of the land would be only subject to further orders passed by this Court in light of the Commissions report. The Commission may proceed with the survey in relation to the acquired lands in other villages, as suggested in paragraph 9 of the scheme only after submitting its report in respect of village Gopalpur and subject to further orders by this court. The officers of the State Government and the coal company shall extend full help and cooperation to the Commission in preparing the report and in the discharge of their duties in terms of the scheme." 4. In pursuance of the orders of this Court, a report was submitted by Justice Parichha which was accepted by this Court but the implementation thereof still remained incomplete. 5. Learned Amicus has submitted a report dated 4th July 2017 in respect of outstanding issues and has made recommendations as follows:- "(i) As far as any compensation amount which is lying in fixed deposits is concerned, the same must be accounted for at periodic intervals jointly by the Collector as well as by a senior officer of MCL. The said amounts must be safeguarded suitably by the Commission and the Commission would be at liberty to seek appropriate direction from this Court as and when its work is completed.(ii) Issue directions to the Collector, Sundargarh as well as the Chairman and Managing Director of MCL to ensure disbursement of compensation to all the beneficiaries of the 8 villages (namely Balinga, Bankibahal, Garjan Bahal, Gopalpur, Karlikachar, Kunda, Sardega and Tiklipada) on or before 31st July 2017, and to ensure disbursement of compensation to all the beneficiaries of the 2 villages, (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela) on or before 31st November, 2017.(iii) The Divisional Commissioner, Sambalpur, to make adequate efforts to trace the persons who have not turned up to receive compensation. The Collectors concerned will contact their counterparts in States where awardees are known to migrate, and adopt suitable methodologies to identify the concerned person.(iv) Issue directions to the authorities of MCL to furnish a list, jointly verified by the Collector and the Assistant Revenue Officer indicating the names of the all awardees of compensation, the dates when they were entitled to payment, the actual dates when payment was made and whether that payment included interest, to the Claims Commission as well as the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent parties.(v) It may be clarified that even with respect two villages (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela), when the payment of compensation is made, interest, as payable, will be determined to be paid in accordance with Orders of the Honble Supreme Court. Payment of interest in respect of delayed payment will be undertaken if interest was not paid in accordance with the Orders of the Court.(vi) where genuine cases of fraud and impersonation are alleged by MCL, the Claims Commission be empowered to examine such cases and forward recommendations to the Learned Amicus.(vii) Direct the authorities of MCL to complete the process of granting employment, payment of monetary compensation in lieu of employment, including annuities on or before 31st July 2017 with respect to 8 villages (namely Balinga, Bankibahal, Garjan Bahal, Gopalpur, Karlikachar, Kunda, Sardega and Tiklipada) and on or before 31st November, 2017 with respect to 2 villages (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela).(viii) Issue directions to the Chairman and Managing Director of MCL to immediately stop any illegal mining being undertaken by MCL on agricultural lands in any of the villages.(ix) Issue directions to MCL authorities to complete the development of resettlement colonies in the two sites (namely Barapalli II and Chatanpalli) on or before 30th September, 2017.(x) Once even one of the rehabilitation sites is ready and the site has been certified as suitable for shifting by the Claims Commission, the Honble Claims Commission may pay pass appropriate orders enabling the shifting of those persons who are entitled to R&R Benefits in the said site.In view of the above, it is submitted that the following general directions are also necessary -(xi) That the Managing Director of MCL either himself or by a designated officer will be personally responsible for the implementation of the directions of the Supreme Court and the orders by the Commission.(xii) Suitable steps will be taken by the MCL to complete the process of disbursement of compensation.(xiii) Compensation will be disbursed to the satisfaction of the Commission.(xiv) Employment must be offered to all those left out (Categories I & II in any event) and such employment must be offered and completed to the satisfaction of the Commission.(xv) Rehabiliation steps must be completed within a period of nine months from today.(xvi) Only upon the rehabilitation being certified by the Commission and experts that a notice can be issued by the Commission asking the oustees to shift to alternate sites.(xvii) Fresh notices be issued by the Commission in respect of awardees who have not received monies(xviii) In respect of awardees who have not been paid money in time, interest is payable and such interest be awarded at a rate not exceeding 15% by the Commission calculating the same with reference to the orders of this Honble Court.(xix) It is also necessary that a list of all the awardees including the names and the amounts disbursed to them, jointly signed by the Collector and MCL, must be made available to the Claims Commission as well as counsel for the oustees forthwith,(xx) In so far as acquisition of additional land for resettlement and rehabilitation is concerned, suitable assistance will be offered by the State authorities including the Divisional Commissioner Sambalpur." 6. We are broadly in agreement with the recommendations made by the learned Amicus. We, however, leave it open to the appellants or any other affected parties to put forward their objections before the High Court/Commission since we are inclined to leave such matters to be dealt with by the High Court/Commission.7. With regard to recommendation XIV, learned counsel for the appellants has an objection on the ground that the issue is covered by the Orrisa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2006. Learned Amicus states that the recommendation is consistent with the report of Parichha Commission which has already been accepted by this Court. This aspect of the matter may be gone into by the High Court, if necessary.8. One of the issues which is surviving is as regards constructed housing on the land allocated for rehabilitation and resettlement by the affected persons. Mr. Dhankar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants states that it is not clear whether all such persons want constructed housing or not.

Decision reasoning: 1[ds]6. We are broadly in agreement with the recommendations made by the learned Amicus. We, however, leave it open to the appellants or any other affected parties to put forward their objections before the High Court/Commission since we are inclined to leave such matters to be dealt with by the High Court/Commission.7. With regard to recommendation XIV, learned counsel for the appellants has an objection on the ground that the issue is covered by the Orrisa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2006. Learned Amicus states that the recommendation is consistent with the report of Parichha Commission which has already been accepted by this Court. This aspect of the matter may be gone into by the High Court, if