Case: Northern Indian Glass Industries Vs. Jaswant Singh

ny approached the State of Haryana for acquisition of land for establishing a sheet glass factory. The State Government, on being satisfied, took a decision to initiate proceedings in respect of the land in question. Preliminary notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 2.7.1973. Thereafter declaration was made under Section 6 on 4.9.1973. The Collector passed the award on 20.6.1974 in respect of the said land, awarding compensation to the land owners i.e. respondent Nos.15herein, a sum of Rs. 3,93,688. 12. The amount of compensation was also paid to the res respondents on 16.10.1974 and the possession of the land was also taken on the same date. The respondents made an application for reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Additional District Judge. Rohtak enhanced the compensation amount by a sum of Rs. 59,349. The respondents15not being satisfied with the enhanced amount of compensation, approached the High Court by filing an appeal. The High Court by judgment dated 2.6.1988 enhanced the compensation by an amount of Rs. 8.10.lakhs2. The respondents filed Civil Writ Petition No. 14735/1991 in the High Court on 25.9.1991 praying for quashing the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and for other reliefs. The said writ petition was allowed by the High Court on 5.3.1992. Hence, this appeal by the company for whose benefit the land was acquired.

Reasoning:
9. Looking to the facts of the present case and conduct of the respondents, the High Court was not at all justified in ignoring the delay and laches and granting relief to them. As already noticed, the respondents15approached the High Court by filing writ petition almost after a period of 17 years after finalization of the acquisition proceedings. They accepted the compensation amount as per the award and sought for enhancement of the compensation amount without challenging the notification issued under Sections 4 and 6. Having sought for enhancement of compensation only, they filed writ petition even three years after the appeals were disposed of by the High Court in the matter of enhancement of compensation. There is no explanation whatsoever for the inordinate delay in filing the writ petitions. Merely because full enhanced compensation amount was not paid to the respondents, that itself was not a ground to condone the delay and laches in filing the writ petition. In our view, the High Court was also not right in ordering restoration of land to the respondents on the ground that the land acquired was not used for which it had been acquired. It isd position in law that passing the award and taking possession under Section 16 of the Act, the acquired land vests with the Government free from all encumbrances. Even if the land is not used for the purpose for which it is acquired, the land owner does not get any right to ask for revesting the land in him and to ask for restitution of the possession12. If the land was not used for the purpose for which it was acquired, it was open to the State Government to take action but that did not confer any right on the respondents to ask for restitution of the land. As already noticed, the State Government in this regard has already initiated proceedings for resumption of the land. In our view, there arises no question of any unjust enrichment to the appellant companyThere is no dispute on that point. We fail to understand how this contention advances the case of the respondents when they did not challenge the acquisition, proceedings, even on that ground if it was available within reasonable time. It was too late for them to challenge the acquisition proceedings on that ground as well.