Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
The Rajasthan State Industrial ... vs Jawari Lal Jain (2025:Rj-Jd:3499-Db) on 20 January, 2025
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati, Madan Gopal Vyas
[2025:RJ-JD:3499-DB] (1 of 4) [SAW-1875/2018]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1875/2018
1. The Rajasthan State Industrial Development And
Investment Corporation Ltd., Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg,
Jaipur Through Its Managing Director, Rajasthan State
Industrial Development And Investment Corporation Ltd.
Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
2. The Regional Manager, Riico Ltd. Boranada, Jodhpur.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Jawari Lal Jain S/o Shri Metghraj Jain, Aged About 62
Years, By Caste Jain, R/o Sharswati Nagar, Jodhpur,
District Jodhpur (Raj.).
2. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Principal Secretary,
Industries Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Land Acquisition Officer- Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil
And District Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Twinkle Purohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Swami
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
20/01/2025
1. This special appeal (writ) has been preferred claiming the
following reliefs:-
"It is therefore, humbly prayed that this special
appeal may kindly be allowed. The judgment impugned
dated 05.05.2018 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge may
kindly be declared illegal and the same may kindly be
quashed and set aside. The writ petition preferred by the
[2025:RJ-JD:3499-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-1875/2018]
petitioners may kindly be ordered to be dismissed with
cost."
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is no more res-integra, as
the same has attained finality by the judgment passed by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court in D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ
No.173/2019 (The Rajasthan State Industrial Development
and Investment Corporation Ltd., & Anr. Vs. Jawari lal Jain
& Ors.) along with other connected matters, decided on
06.07.2020, relevant portion of which reads as under:-
"13. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the
Supreme Court in Indore Development Authority's case
(supra) that:(i) The proviso is part of Section 24(2) and
cannot be read as part of Section 24(1)(b); (ii) The window
period of five years is provided to complete the acquisition
proceedings, where the award has been passed under Section
11 of the Act of 1894, the provisions of the Act of 1894 shall
be applied as if it has not been repealed; and (iii) In case
where the award is passed during the window period of five
years in terms of Section 24(1)(b), the compensation is to be
paid under the Act of 1894 and not under the Act of 2013, the
only contention raised by the writ petitioners as aforesaid falls
through and therefore, the order under appeal passed by the
learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside.
14. Coming to the contention of the learned counsel for the
respondents that even under the Scheme of Act of 1894, as
soon as the award is passed, the Collector must be armed
with the amount of compensation payable to the person
interested, suffice it to say that no such case was ever set out
by the writ petitioners in the writ petition filed or the present
appeals and therefore, the question of consideration of the
abstract contention sought to be raised by the writ petitioners
at this stage, without any foundation of fact, cannot be
entertained by this Court. Moreover, under Section 31 of the
[2025:RJ-JD:3499-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-1875/2018]
Act of 1894, on making the award under Section 11, the
Collector shall tender payment of compensation awarded by
him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to
award and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one
or more of the contingency mentioned in sub-sections (2), (3)
and (4) of Section 31. From the provisions of Section 31, in no
manner it could be inferred that if the award amount is
deposited with some delay, it will vitiate the acquisition
proceedings. It is pertinent to note that the writ petitioners
have already accepted the amount of compensation with
interest and therefore, at this stage, even otherwise, they are
precluded from raising any issue regarding the legality of land
acquisition proceedings on the ground of alleged violation of
the provisions of the Act of 1894.
15. In the result, the special appeals succeed, the same are
hereby allowed. The orders under appeal dated
5.5.2018/14.5.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of
this Court are set aside. The writ petitions preferred by the
writ petitioners are dismissed. No order as to costs "
3. Learned counsel for the respondents is unable to refute the
above submission.
4. Accordingly, the instant special appeal (writ) is allowed in
terms of the order passed by this Court in The Rajasthan State
Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd.
(Supra) and the impugned judgment dated 05.05.2018 passed by
learned Single Bench in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14425/2017
(Asharam Singhal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), is quashed and
set aside.
5. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
8-nirmala/-
[2025:RJ-JD:3499-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-1875/2018]
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
