Kendriya Karamchari S.G.N.Samiti Ltd vs State Of U.P. & Anr

3. To appreciate the controversy raised by the appellants, it may be appropriate to narrate the facts of the case in Civil Appeal Nos. 6850-6851 of 2003. According to the Kendriya Karamchari Sehkari Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd.(`the Samiti' for short)-appellant herein, proceedings under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 4 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') for acquisition of 325.353 acres of land of village Chhalera, Pargana & Tehsil Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar had been initiated. The land was sought to be acquired for public purpose, viz., Planned Development of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), Gautam Budh Nagar. Preliminary notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Act by applying urgency clause, was issued on October 30, 1987. It was published in the Official Gazette on February 27, 1988. The final notification under Section 6 read with Section 17 of the Act was issued on June 12, 1989 and published in Official Gazette on December 14, 1989. Notices were published in the newspaper indicating acquisition of land of various land-owners on February 05, 1990. Award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, NOIDA, District Ghaziabad in terms of Dispute No. 135 of 1988-92 on February 04, 1992. According to the appellant, the Land 5 Acquisition Officer awarded compensation to the land-owners at the rate of Rs.43.64 ps. per sq. yard. It may be stated that according to the appellant-Samiti, it purchased a part of the land on November 15, 1990. The land was transferred in the name of the Samiti. It is the case of the appellant Samiti that several land-owners were not satisfied with the amount of award offered by the Land Acquisition Officer and they sought Reference under Section 18 of the Act. More than 50 such References, therefore, came up for consideration before the Reference Court. The Court of the Additional Upper District Judge-X, Ghaziabad by judgment and order dated August 28, 2000 enhanced the compensation awarded to the land-owners by holding that the land-owners were entitled to a sum of Rs.148.75 ps. per sq. yd. with 30% solatium and 12% interest per annum. It was also observed that the amount paid pursuant to the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer would be adjusted while making payment 6 by the authorities as per the order in Reference.

4. So far as the appellant-Samiti is concerned, it could not make Reference along with other land-owners under Section 18 of the Act. It, therefore, filed an application through its President Charan Singh, son of late Budh Singh on September 06, 2000 to the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Gautam Budh Nagar under Section 28A of the Act, inter alia, praying therein that the land of the applicant had been acquired for public purpose, the applicant, who was the President of the Samiti, had purchased the land from the Samiti in December, 1990 and his name had also been entered in the Revenue Record. It was also stated by him that he could not challenge the Award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Reference Court, however, decided the Reference in other cases and granted enhanced compensation. The same benefit, therefore, should be allowed to him 7 also on the basis of the order passed by the Reference Court. The said application was made on September 06, 2000 i.e. within a period of three months from the date of decision in the Reference.

5. The main grievance of the applicant was that though in the light of the decision of Reference Court allowing the Reference and granting enhanced compensation to other land- owners, the appellant also ought to have been granted the similar benefit and he ought to have been paid additional amount as held by the Reference Court, no decision had been taken by the Additional District Magistrate and his application was kept pending. According to the applicant, probably it was done keeping in view the fact that being aggrieved by the order passed by the Reference Court, the authorities preferred appeal being FAO No. 456 of 2001, etc. and the order passed by the Reference Court was challenged in the High Court. It also appears that the High Court entertained those 8 appeals and also passed interim order of stay on September 17, 2001. By the said order, operation of the order passed by the Reference Court was stayed on condition that NOIDA would deposit the entire amount awarded under the Reference within two months from the date of the order. The claimants were permitted to withdraw 25% of such amount without furnishing security and further 25% on furnishing security. The remaining amount (50%) was ordered to be invested in Fixed Term Deposit in a Nationalized Bank.

11. On April 12, 2002, notice was issued. Similar notices were issued in other matters. Leave was granted on August 29, 2003. The matters were thereafter placed for final hearing and that is how the matters are before us.

(iv) The person moving the application did not make an application to the Collector under Section 18;

(v) The application is moved within three months from the date of the award on the basis of which the re-determination of amount of compensation is sought; and

35. For the foregoing reasons, in our opinion, the appeals deserve to be partly allowed. The order passed by the High Court in all these matters are set aside but validity of Government Orders dated January 14, 1994 and June 13, 2001 is upheld.

36. We may, however, hasten to add that as observed hereinabove, we are not deciding about the locus standi of the appellant. As and when the question will come up before the 32 Collector/Land Acquisition Officer, after the disposal of first appeals before the High Court or before this Court or after the decision attains finality, such question as to maintainability may be decided on its own merits after hearing the parties. All contentions of all parties are kept open.

37. The appeals are accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. In view of the facts and in the circumstances of the cases, however, there shall be no order as to costs.