THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION Nos.5336 and 5868 of 2017
COMMON ORDER:
The dispute in both the writ petitions has arisen out of land
acquisition award dated 31.10.2014 in File No.B/893/2013 under
the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short
'the Act'). The petitioners in both the writ petitions are aggrieved by
the action of the respondents in not passing award and paying
compensation in compliance of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 'the Act 30 of 2013').
2. The petitioners in WP.No.5336 of 2017 are owners of the following acquired properties:
Sl. Municipal No. Extent
No. Sq. yards
1. 9-4-64/13 20.67
2. 9-4-64/12 20.12
3. 9-4-64/16 11.47
4. 9-4-64/14 & 15/1 62.60
5. 9-4-64/125/J, 9-4-64/15 200.37
& 15/1
5. 9-4-119/A/B and 117 19.74
9-4-116/A/B & 117
2
The petitioner in WP.No.5868 of 2017 is the owner of the property bearing Municipal No.8-1-368/A (P) admeasuring 84.69 sq. yards situated at Tolichowki, Hyderabad.
3. The draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 24.10.2013 and published in the local newspapers on 28.10.2013. Section 5A enquiry was conducted by the respondents on 28.11.2013 wherein the petitioners participated. Draft declaration under Section 6(6) of the Act published on 18.12.2013. Award was passed on 31.10.2014. The possession of the aforementioned properties was taken by the respondents on 12.11.2014.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that notice of award under Section 12(2) of the Act was served on 05.11.2014 and compensation was received by them under protest on 11.11.2014. Thereafter, the petitioners filed an application under Section 18 of the Act without prejudice to their rights and matter was referred to the XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad vide OP.Nos.64, 63, 62 and 61 of 2016 and OP.No.55 of 2016 before the XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
5. Mr. Damodar Mundra, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Act was repealed on 31.04.2013 by the Act 30 of 3 2013 and compensation has to be paid under the provisions of the Act 30 of 2013. However, in the instant case, the compensation was paid under the Act. The same is illegal. He further submitted that the award has to be set aside and direction be issued to the respondents to re-determine the compensation as per the provisions of the Act 30 of 2013.
6. In the counter of the respondents, it was contended that there are lapses on the part of the petitioner. Award was passed on 31.10.2014. The writ petition was filed in the year 2017. The petitioners have received compensation and handed over physical possession of the property. They availed benefit under Section 18 reference claiming enhanced compensation and as such, they are not entitled to claim compensation under the Act 30 of 2013.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied on a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in D. MAHESH KUMAR v. STATE OF TELANGANA1. In the said judgment, award enquiry was initiated under the Act of 1894. Awards were passed before the Act 30 of 2013 came into force on 01.01.2014. The issue before the learned Division Bench was whether compensation, which was, admittedly, not paid prior to 01.01.2014, has to be paid under the Act 30 of 1 2017 (1) ALT 400 4 2013 or under the Act of 1894. This Court held that the petitioners are entitled for compensation prescribed under the Act 30 of 2013.
8. However, in the instant case, the petitioners have a better case on facts. Admittedly, the award was passed on 31.10.2014 and compensation was paid to the petitioners on 11.11.2014. Thereafter, possession was taken from the petitioners on 12.11.2014. Section 24 of the Act 30 of 2013 reads as under:
"24. Land acquisition process under Act No. 1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,--
(a) where no award under section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or
(b) where an award under said section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been repealed."
9. In the present case, the award was not passed before 01.01.2014, when the Act 30 of 2013 came into force and Act, 1894 was repealed. The award dated 31.10.2014 was passed under the repealed Act and the same is void and non-est in the eye of law.5
10. In view of the clear mandate under Section 24(1)(a) of the Act 30 of 2013, the respondents ought to have passed the award under the Act 30 of 2013. Even if Section 4(1) notification was issued under the Act of 1894, still the award enquiry should have been conducted and compensation paid under the Act 30 of 2013.
11. In view of the above observations, the writ petitions are allowed. The award dated 31.10.2014 is set aside insofar as the petitioners are concerned. The respondents are directed to issue notice for award enquiry and re-determine the compensation as per Section 25 of the Act 30 of 2013. Consequently, Section 18 reference vide OP.Nos.64, 63, 62 and 61 of 2016 and OP.No.55 of 2016 on the file of the XXIV and XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, is also set aside. The learned Judge is directed to close the OP's. After redetermination of compensation under the Act 30 of 2013, the compensation amount already received by the petitioner pursuant to the provisions of the Act of 1894 shall be adjusted and balance compensation amount shall be paid to the petitioners. The award enquiry, redetermination of compensation and payment of compensation shall be completed within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J August 17, 2022 DSK