Narendra . vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh

Reference court, vide its judgment and order dated 19 th April, 1999, increased the rate of compensation from Rs.50/- per sq. yards to Rs.90/- per square yards. Even this increase in the compensation was not to the satisfaction of the land owners. Various appeals came to be filed. Appeals were also filed by these appellants claiming that the compensation be enhanced to Rs. 115/- per square yards. Some of the other land owners whose lands were acquired, however, had claimed higher compensation. The first batch of appeals filed by others was decided by the High Court by judgment dated 13 th November, 2014. The High Court found merit in those appeals and fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards. When the appeals of the appellants herein came up for hearing before the Civil Appeal Nos. 10429-10430 of 2017 [@SLP(C) Nos. 2354-2355 of 2017] Page 2 of 16 High Court, the High Court took note of its earlier judgment and accepted the fact that the land of the appellants was acquired by the same Notification vide which land of others was acquired wherein the High Court had awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards. Notwithstanding the same, insofar as the appellants are concerned, the High Court has limited the compensation to Rs.115/- per square yards because of the reasoning that the appellant had demanded compensation at that rate only and had paid the court fees also accordingly. Therefore, opined the High Court, it was difficult to allow compensation at a rate higher than the rate claimed by the appellants.

4) Before proceeding to discuss the aforesaid question, we may mention that insofar as the order of the High Court fixing compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards is concerned, special leave petition was filed by the GDA which was Civil Appeal Nos. 10429-10430 of 2017 [@SLP(C) Nos. 2354-2355 of 2017] Page 3 of 16 dismissed by this Court. Review thereof was sought which was also dismissed. Even the curative petition filed by the GDA came to be dismissed. Thus, the order of the High Court granting compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards in respect of these acquisition proceedings has attained finality.

Purposive interpretation is given to subserve the ends of justice particularly when the cases of vulnerable groups are decided. The Court has to keep in mind the ‘problem solving approach’ by adopting therapeutic approaches to the maximum extent the law permits rather than ‘just deciding’ cases, thereby bridging the gap between law and life, between law and justice. The notion of access to justice is to be taken in a broader sense. The objective is to render justice to the needy and that means fair solutions to the conflict thereby providing real access to ‘justice’.

17) In fine, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and these appeals are allowed holding that appellants are also entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards. The difference in compensation along with other statutory benefits under the Act shall be calculated and paid to the appellants within a period of three months from today. It is also directed that the appellants shall make good in deficiency of court fee before the High Court. Appellants shall also be entitled to costs of these appeals.

SEPTEMBER 11, 2017.

Civil Appeal Nos. 10429-10430 of 2017 [@SLP(C) Nos. 2354-2355 of 2017] Page 15 of 16

Date : 11-09-2017 This matter was called on for pronouncement of judgment today.

Appeal is allowed in terms of signed Reportable Judgment.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file) Civil Appeal Nos. 10429-10430 of 2017 [@SLP(C) Nos. 2354-2355 of 2017] Page 16 of 16