Punjab-Haryana High Court

Pankaj Manga And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Others on 6 September, 2024

Author: Sureshwar Thakur

Bench: Sureshwar Thakur

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB




        (1)


          In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

[101]                         CM-9049-CWP-2024 & CM-9050-CWP-2024
                              RA-CW-178-2024 & RA-CW-189-2024 in
                              CWP-2303-1996
                              Date of Decision: 06.09.2024

1.      Pankaj Manga S/o Mahender r/o Mohalla Thai, Palwal, Distt.
        Faridabad.
2.      Anil son of Girdhari Lal, resident of Shaki Nagar, Delhi.
3.      Gian Chand s/o Sohan Lal (since deceased) through his legal
representatives:-
        (i) Pramod Jain, aged 67 years, s/o Sh. Gian Chand Jain, resident of
        House No.DO-402, Ward No.15, Near Government Hospital, Palwal,
        Haryana 121102.
        Aadhar Card No. 6603 1569 2426, M. No.8168030812.
        (ii) Vinod Kumar Jain s/o Sh. Gian Chand Jain, aged 63 years, resi-
        dent of House No.DS-165/4, Peerwali Gali, Palwal, Haryana 121102.
        Aadhar Card No.8507 7335 2439, M. No.9416279201.
        (iii) Subhodh Kumar Jain s/o Sh. Gian Chand Jain, aged 59 years,
        resident of Gali No.3, Ward No.31, Opp. Jain Mandir, Baba Garments
        Wale, Palwal, Haryana 121102.
        Aadhar Card No. 8862        9200 2137, M. No.9467735920
        (iv) Sanjeev Kumar Jain s/o Sh. Gian Chand Jain, aged 56 years,
        resident of House No.165/6, Dharam Nagar Colony, Near Jain
        Mandir, Ward No.31, Palwal, Haryana 121102.
4.      Shashi son of Ugar Sen Gupta, r/o Siri Ford Road, Delhi.
5.      Yash Pal Jain s/o Dhan Pal Singh Jain, r/o Agra Chowk Palwal
        District Faridabad.                                      ...Petitioners
                                            Versus

1.      State of Haryana through the Secretary Govt. Haryana,
        Urban Estate Department, Chandigarh.
2.      The Haryana Urban Development Authority through its Chief
        Administrator at Panchkula.
3.      The land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate of Haryana,
        Sector 12, Faridabad.                                    ...Respondents

                                  1 of 11
              ::: Downloaded on - 21-09-2024 08:41:18 :::
                             Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB




      (2)


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR

Present:     Mr. Puneet Bali, Senior Advocate with
             Mr. Viren Sibbal, Advocate and
             Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate with
             Ms. Swati Singal, Advocate for the review-applicants
             (in RA-CW-178-2024).

             Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with
             Mr. Eeshan Garg, Advocate for the review-applicant
             (in RA-CW-189-2024).

        Mr. P.P. Chahar, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
               ***
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL)

CM-9049-CWP-2024

Exemption application is allowed, as prayed for.

CM-9050-CWP-2024

1. Through the instant impleadment application, a prayer is made,

but post the pronouncement of the final verdict dated 24.04.2024, upon

CWP-2303-1996, thus for impleadment being made of the applicant, in

substitution of his deceased predecessor-in-interest arrayed as co-petitioner

No.3, who died during the pendency of CWP-2303-1996.

2. Since the verdict made, on 24.04.2024, upon CWP-2303-1996

was made with one of the litigants thereins, inasmuch as, petitioner No.3

not then being alive nor his becoming substituted by his LRs. Therefore, the

decision made, on CWP-2303-1996, is void, and, non est, the same being

made vis-a-vis the deceased litigant (supra). Therefore, the said verdict is

quashed, and, set aside.

3. Amended petition has been filed, and, the same is taken on

record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place.

2 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

CWP-2303-1996

1. Through the instant petition, the petitioners seek the quashing

of notification bearing No. LAC (F)-92/NTLA/179 dated 10.12.1992

(Annexure P-1), and, also seek the quashing of notification bearing No.

LAC (F)-NTLA-93/245 dated 07.12.1993 (Annexure P-3). The said

notification(s) were respectively issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act of 1894') thus for the public

purpose namely, development of residential Sectors 1 and 2, Palwal.

2. The principal ground as raised in the instant writ petition rather

by the petitioners for theirs seeking the writ reliefs, is grounded in the

factum, that the subject properties, though became raised on the disputed

lands but prior to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the 'Act of

1894' yet the acquiring authority not releasing them from acquisition.

3. Moreover, the further ground as raised in the instant writ

petition rather for challenging the Annexures (supra), is rested, on the

premise that the acquiring authority in not releasing the subject lands from

acquisition, thereby it has breached the mandate of this Court recorded on

03.02.2012, upon CWP No. 15546 of 1995 and other connected petition(s),

whereby this Court after quashing the impugned therein acquisition

notification(s), rather proceeded to permit the land losers therein to retain

possession over the subject lands.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has argued, that when

there is almost close identically inter-se the notification(s) challenged in the

said petition, and, in the instant writ petition, thereby but naturally the relief

as became granted in the verdict (supra), is also to be accorded to the

present petitioners.

3 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

5. However, for the reasons to be assigned hereinafter, the relief

as claimed in the instant petition thus for quashing the notification(s)

(supra), as became made respectively under Sections 4 and 6 of the 'Act of

1894', rather is not required to be accorded nor any relief relating to the

petitioners being permitted to yet invoke the provisions of Section 24 (2) of

the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter for short called as

'the Act of 2013'), thus is to be accorded to them.

6. The subject lands are comprised in Khasra Nos. 34//27 (5K-

10M), 1936 (1K-12M) situated in Village Palwal, District Palwal. The said

lands are stated in the reply, on affidavit furnished to the instant writ

petition by the respondent concerned, to be acquired through the impugned

notification(s).

7. It is also stated in the reply, on affidavit, that at the time of

launching of acquisition proceedings, the subject lands were vacant and/or

no construction(s) existed thereovers.

8. Furthermore, since it is also stated in the reply, on affidavit that

the petitioners had filed objections under Section 5A of the 'Act of 1894',

therebys seeking the making of an order for release of the subject

lands/construction(s), as became raised by the petitioners, but the said

objections are stated to be rejected, but after an opportunity of hearing

being granted to the present petitioners, thus on the ground that the subject

lands were entirely vacant at the time of issuance of a notification under

Section 4 of the 'Act of 1894' and the same are required for the purpose of

the development of the area. Therefore, it is contended that the order

dismissing the objections, as became raised by the present petitioners 4 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

against the acquisition of the subject lands/construction(s), thus is both a

well informed, besides a well made order and does not require any

interference.

9. Be that as it may, since it is also stated in the reply, on affidavit

that the subject lands are an integral component of the layout plan besides

are direly required for completing the developmental works, inasmuch as

the subject lands affect not only the green belt, besides also affect the site of

the 9 meter road, and also affect the site of the primary school. If so, the

petitioners cannot raise any claim for this Court making any tinkerings with

the layout plans, as therebys this Court would be making ill tinkerings with

the said layout plans.

10. Furthermore, it is also stated, on reply on affidavit, that an

immense expenditure has been incurred by the respondent concerned, in

undertaking various developmental activities over the acquired lands.

Resultantly also therebys this Court cannot make any order for releasing the

petitioners lands, as therebys the expending of substantial sums of monies

towards developmental works over the acquired lands, thus would become

rendered nugatory, wherebys loss would ensue to the public exchequer.

11. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners by relying upon

the decision made by this Court, upon CWP No. 15546 of 1995, titled as

'Gulshan Malik and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Ors' decided on

03.02.2012, have argued that in terms thereof, the instant writ petition be

also allowed.

12. However, for the reasons to be assigned hereinafter, the

reliance as made upon the said decision is a mis-placed reliance, as the

verdict (supra) became confined but only in respect of the lands located in 5 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

District Faridabad, and, did not relate to the lands appertaining to Sector -

2, Palwal, especially when the connected petition(s) appertaining to Sector

- 2, Palwal, were ordered to be listed for further hearing, besides when the

notification(s) challenged in the verdict (supra), and, also the awards, as

became rendered in the said writ petition(s) rather are distinct from the

notification(s) challenged in the instant writ petition, besides the award

rendered in the writ petition (supra) is contra distinct to the award rendered

in the instant case. Resultantly, therebys there is no well founded leverage

in the petitioners for theirs claiming parity with the petitioners in the writ

petition (supra).

13. It further appears that on the basis of verdict (supra), the

petitioners were able to get the mutation of Khasra No. 1936 (6K-7M)

falling in Village Palwal, District Palwal attested in their favour from the

revenue officer concerned, but it has been stated that the process qua the

rectification of the said mutation as untenably made in favour of the

petitioners, is underway, especially when the said mutation has been made

on a mis propounded claim of parity to the petitioners in the instant writ

petition rather with the petitioners in the writ petition (supra).

14. Consequently, it is directed, that the said apposite

process/application for rectification of the mutation recorded in favour of

the present petitioners, thus be expedited and be also ensured to be

expeditiously concluded.

15. Furthermore, from a perusal of reply, on affidavit, it is revealed

that possession of the land of the petitioners falling in Khasra No. 1936

(1K-12M) of village Palwal, District Palwal, became assumed through rapat

roznamcha No. 304 dated 06.12.1995, whereafter the possession thereof 6 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

was handed over to the beneficiary department and award No. 19 dated

06.12.1995 was pronounced in respect of the said Khasra number.

16. Moreover, when it is further indicated in the reply, on affidavit,

furnished to the writ petition, by the respondent concerned, that out of total

amount of assessed compensation, qua 94 % thereof rather becomes

disbursed to the land losers concerned. Furthermore, it has been stated that

as far as the compensation of the land of the petitioners is concerned,

despite the same becoming tendered, yet the petitioners not seeking

disbursement(s) thereof, leading to the same becoming deposited in the

Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Palwal, for therebys it

becoming available for becoming released to the land losers concerned.

17. Therefore, the effect of the above, is naturally qua the

respondent concerned, thus adducing adequate discharging evidence in

respect of the hereafter duo of parameters, as, spelt by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in its verdict rendered in case titled as 'Indore Development Authority

Versus Manoharlal and others', to which SLP (Civil) Nos. 9036-9038 of

2016, has been assigned,

a) Rapat possession becoming assumed over the acquired lands

by the acquiring authority before the coming into force of the 'Act of

2013');

b) the assessed compensation amount becoming deposited for

thereby it becoming released to the land losers concerned, especially when

the said deposits have been made prior to the coming into force of the 'Act

of 2013'.

7 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

18. Resultantly the petitioners also therebys cannot claim the

making of a lapsing declaration in terms of Section 24 (2) of the 'Act of

2013'.

19. Since, therebys the subject lands becomes free from all

encumbrances and are completely vested in the acquiring authority.

Resultantly therebys the occupation of the petitioners, over the subject lands

rather is as trespassers thereovers and the petitioners are required to be

lawfully vacated therefroms.

20. Furthermore, though the petitioners in the alternative claim that

since no award with regard to Khasra No. 34//27 (5K-10M) of Village

Palwal, District Palwal has been pronounced within the period of limitation

prescribed in Section 11 of the 'Act of 1894', thereby the acquisition

proceedings are vitiated. Resultantly, it is contended that if the subject lands

are required for the public purpose, thereby a fresh award be directed to be

made in terms of the relevant provisions, as encapsulated in the 'Act of

2013'. 21. However, the above argument is merit-less, as evidently, on the

date of pronouncement of the subject lands award, there was a stay/status

quo order in operation with respect to the land falling in Khasra No. 34//27

(5K-10M) of village Palwal, District Palwal. Consequently, when on

account of pendency of the instant writ petition or on account of the interim

order of stay, as became passed by this Court, thus the Collector concerned

became precluded to make an award in terms of Section 11 of the 'Act of

1894'.

22. Consequently, when in the above said situation, the Hon'ble

Apex Court in a judgment rendered in case titled as 'FaizabadAyodhya

Development Authority, Faizabad Versus Dr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey and 8 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

Others ; 2022 Live Law (SC) 504, made the hereinafter extracted

expostulations of law, qua the pendency of the judicial proceedings or the

passing of any interim order, when the relevant proceedings are subjudice

before a Court of Law, thus causing a well deterrence upon the acquiring

authority, to make an award in terms of Section 11 of the 'Act of 1894'. The

relevant paragraphs No. 10.12 and 10.13, and 17 (i) thereof are extracted

hereinafter.

10.12 Thus, it is necessary to dwell into the reasons as to why no award has been made. As discussed aforesaid, if there is an order of restraint on the Collector or on the acquiring authority and as a result of which, the Collector or the Land Acquisition Officer is not in a position to make an award for reasons beyond his control and in compliance of the interim order granted by a court of law at the instance of the land owner or any other person who may have questioned the acquisition, the period during which the interim order has operated has to be reckoned and if on the date of enforcement of Act, 2013 i.e., 01.01.2014, no award has been made owing to the operation of such an interim order granted by a Court in favour of the land owner, then the provisions of the 2013, Act cannot straightaway be made applicable in the determination of the compensation. This is because, but for the operation of the interim order, the award could have been made under the provisions of the Act, 1894 until 31.12.2013 and then provisions of Act, 1894 would have applied as per clause (b) of sub-section 1 of Section 24. But on the other hand, owing to the operation of the interim order granted by a Court in favour of land owner, the award would not have been made as on 01.01.2014 when the Act, 2013 was enforced.

10.13 In our view in such a situation the acquiring authority cannot be burdened with the determination of compensation under the provisions of the Act, 2013. In other words, the land owner cannot, on the one hand, assail the acquisition and seek interim orders restraining the authorities from proceeding further in the acquisition, and on the other hand, contend that since no award has been made under Section 11 of Act, 1894 on 01.01.2014, the provisions of the Act, 2013 should be made applicable in determining the compensation.

9 of 11

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117193-DB

17. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is ob- served as under:-

(i) It is concluded and held that in a case where on the date of commencement of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, no award has been declared under Section 11 of the Act, 1894, due to the pendency of any proceedings and/or the interim stay granted by the Court, such landowners shall not be entitled to the compensation under Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013 and they shall be entitled to the compensation only under the Act, 1894.

23. The import of the above expostulations, is that, the non

rendition of awards under the 'Act of 1894', when arises from stay orders

becoming granted by the Courts of Law, thereby the launching of

acquisition proceedings under the 'Act of 1894', thus would not become

lapsed, rather the Collector concerned, may in terms of Section 11 of the

'Act of 1894', thus make an award.

24. Therefore, this Court in tandem therewith concludes that in

respect of those tracts of lands qua which no award became passed, owing

to the operation of the apposite orders of stay, thus becoming granted by

this Court, therebys the Collector concerned, may in terms of the

explanation carried in Section 11-A of the 'Act of 1894', thus proceed to

make the awards.