Rajasthan High Court
Sita Ram And Ors vs State Urban Developmentors ... on 17 October, 2024
Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Ganesh Ram Meena
[2024:RJ-JP:43589-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 198/2016
1. Sitaram S/o Shri Ram Sahai,
2. Ramu S/o Shri Shrinarayan,
3. Nathi W/o Late Juntha,
4. Babu Lal S/o Shri Jagannath,
5. Ramdhan S/o Shri Jagannath,
6. Shankar Lal S/o Shri Madholal,
7. Kailash S/o Shri Madholal,
8. Gopal S/o Shri Madholal,
9. Prabhu S/o Shri Teja,
10. Kani W/o Late Shri Ganesh,
11. Kalyan Sahay S/o Late Shri Ganesh
12. Lal Chand S/o Shri Ganesh,
13. Bhanwar Lal S/o Shri Ganesh,
14. Hari Narain S/o Shri Ganesh,
15. Gulli W/o Late Mulya,
16. Lal Chand S/o Late Shri Mulya,
17. Babu Lal S/o Late Shri Mulya,
All resident of Village Abhaypura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur
----Appellants
Versus
1 State of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Urban
Development and Housing Department, Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Jaipur Development Authority through its Commissioner,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur
3. The Land Acquisition Officer, Urban Development Scheme,
Jaipur Development Authority, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur
4. the Additional Commissioner (Lands), Jaipur Development
Authority, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna with
Mr. Ranvijay Singh
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Neha Amola with
Mr. Yuvraj Samant
[2024:RJ-JP:43589-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-198/2016]
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment
17/10/2024
Heard.
This appeal arises out of common order passed on
01.02.2016 by the learned Single Judge in the matter of challenge
to land acquisition proceedings. Though, challenge to the land
acquisition proceedings was repelled by learned Single Judge,
while partly allowing 24 petitions including petition of present
appellants, it was directed that the respondents shall either pay
compensation to the appellants, at the market value as prevailing
during the period when the possession of their respective land was
taken or allotment of 25% of the developed land as per circular
dated 27.10.2005 to the appellants for the same within a period of
15 days from the date of the order.
The appellants herein did not proceed to take either of the
option of receiving compensation or submitting option of land as
they all filed present appeal assailing legality and validity of the
order passed by learned Single Judge. Since then, this appeal has
remained pending.
Today when the matter comes up for hearing, learned
counsel for the appellants would submit that this appeal may also
be disposed off in terms of order dated 27.07.2023 passed in
batch of writ appeals arising out of the common order dated
01.02.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge. It is submitted
that the present appellants and the appellants whose appeals
were disposed off on 27.07.2023 by common order are identically
situated. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the
[2024:RJ-JP:43589-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-198/2016]
appellants give up the challenge to land acquisition proceedings
and respondent-Jaipur Development Authority may be directed to
consider them for allotment of alternative land as per their
scheme which was existing on the date when the acquisition had
taken place and also on the date when the order was passed by
the learned Single Judge on 01.02.2016.
Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that when
the aforesaid appeals of other appellants arising out of order
dated 01.02.2016 of the learned Single Judge came up for hearing
on 27.07.2023, it was submitted that the scheme which was
existing on the date of acquisition of land and the date on which
the order was passed by the learned Single Judge on 01.02.2016
since stands amended subsequently vide another circular dated
01.06.2022, wherein, it has been stipulated that in those cases
where compensation has been deposited, alternative land as
proposed earlier could not be granted.
The contentions, which are now being raised by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, were also raised before us while
deciding similar appeals. Taking into consideration that the
appellants therein had given up challenge to the land acquisition
proceedings, but prayed for direction to consider for allotment of
alternative land, this Court was inclined to dispose off those
appeals despite objections raised on behalf of the Jaipur
Development Authority. It was observed thus:-
"To our mind, the said circular would not adversely
affect appellants as much as the appellants were allowed by
learned Single Judge to give their option within 15 days
vide order dated 01.02.2016. The reason for not taking the
option was that the appellants were willing to exercise their
right of appeal against the order passed by the learned
[2024:RJ-JP:43589-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-198/2016]
Single Judge and in-fact all of them filed present appeal
which has remained pending since then.
The appellants, at this stage, are not willing to press
this appeal anymore in view of long lapse of time as the
land stands acquired for certain public purpose and,
therefore, the challenge to the acquisition is now given up.
In these circumstances, we are of the view that it should be
obligation on the part of Development Authority to consider
appellants' options if it is submitted within a period of 15
days from today. The circular, which was issued on
01.06.2022, should not come in the way of the appellants
and they should not be denied the same treatment which
was given to all other land owners under the same land
acquisition proceedings merely because the appellants
availed their statutory right of appeal against the order
passed by learned Single Judge. In our considered opinion,
it would be in the interest of justice that the appellants
should also be treated at par with those whose lands were
acquired with their lands and who were offered alternative
lands in lieu of compensation."
Accordingly, this appeal is disposed off, however, with liberty
to the appellants to submit their option within a period of 30 days
from today. If the options are submitted, appellants' claim for
allotment of alternative land in lieu of compensation shall be
examined on the basis of the scheme which was existing on the
day the award was passed. It is made clear that subsequent
modification in the scheme vide circular dated 01.06.2022 shall
not be made a basis to reject the claim of the appellants if
otherwise they are entitled to allotment of land as per the
prevailing scheme of acquisition and allotment of alternative land
in lieu of compensation. It goes without saying that the amount of
compensation would not be payable to the appellants.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ
NAVAL KISHOR /Satyendra/2
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
