Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Land ... vs G.Jebakumar Jebamani on 8 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
1.The Commissioner of Land Administration,
Chennai.
2.The District Collector,
Tirunelveli District.
3.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)
River Linking Project,
Unit III River Linking,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli District. ... Appellants / Petitioners/
Respondents 1 to 3
Vs.
1.G.Jebakumar Jebamani
2.G.Jeba Rajan
3.G.John Samuel ... Respondents/Petitioners/Petitioners
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to
allow the appeal and set aside the order of this Court in Rev.Appln.(MD) No.92
of 2019 in W.P(MD) No.24818 of 2018, dated 11.11.2019, on the file of this
Court.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Baskaran
Standing Counsel for Government
For R-1 : Mr.G.Mohankumar
For R-2 : Ms.R.Porkodi Karnan
for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions
JUDGEMENT
************
[Judgment of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
This appeal filed by the Commissioner of Land Administration,
Chennai, the District Collector, Tirunelveli and the Special Tashdilar (Land
Acquisition), River Linking Project, is directed against the order passed in
Rev.Appln.(MD) No.92 of 2019 in W.P(MD) No.24818 of 2018, dated
11.11.2019.
2.The respondents/writ petitioners prayed for issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus to direct the appellants to pay the arrears of compensation by
applying the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (Central Act 30 of 2013)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
(hereinafter referred to as “the Central Act 30 of 2013”) as assured by the
second appellant vide proceedings dated 02.09.2015.
3. The contention advanced before the learned Writ Court was that
already the writ petitioners had agreed for a compensation and they have
received the entire money and executed a sale deed. The Writ Court examined
the correctness of the said stand and found that when the Additional Chief
Secretary and the Commissioner of Land Administration, passed the
proceedings dated 17.04.2014, it was only a draft award proposal and it was
made clear that it is an interim award. Thus, the award in terms of Section 11 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was not passed and by that time the Central Act
30 of 2013 came into effect and in terms of Section 24 (1)(a) of the Central Act
30 of 2013, if the award is not passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition
Act 1894 on or before 01.01.2014, the new Act will come into force and
compensation has to be computed and paid in terms of the new Act.
4.Admittedly, in the instant case, the award was passed only on
02.09.2015. Considering this fact, the writ petition was allowed and direction
was issued to apply the Central Act 30 of 2013. The Review Application was
filed before the learned Single Bench raising various factual issues. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
learned Writ Court considered the same and issued the following directions:-
18.Therefore, the third review applicant is directed to
conduct the enquiry and conclude the same within a period of 60
days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by applying
the provisions relating to determination of compensation set out
in Central Act 30 of 2013. After the compensation amount is
quantified, the rights of the parties can be adjusted. If the award
amount is more than the amount already paid to the land owners
in terms of the private negotiation, the review applicants are
bound to pay the same within a period of four weeks thereafter.
If the award amount is lesser then what was already paid to the
land owners, then of course the land owners will have to refund
the said amount to the administration.
19.If both the parties stick to the time-line mentioned in
this order, the question of paying interest by either of the parties
will not arise.
This order is impugned in this appeal.
5.We find the order and direction issued by the learned Writ Court in
the Review Application to be fair and reasonable and the legal principle being
that the provisions of the Central Act 30 of 2013 would have been applicable to
the case on hand, has been clearly brought out by the learned Writ Court.
Therefore, we find that there is no error in the order passed in the Review
Application.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
6.For such reasons, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The
direction is issued by the learned Writ Court in the Review Application shall be
complied with, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order. No costs.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
08.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
msa/cp/ogy
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order
that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
msa/cp/ogy
JUDGEMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.930 of 2020
08.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
