Amitabha Chatterjee, J.
1. The present Civil Revisional application is preferred against the order and judgment passed by the appellate authority Metro Railway on 28.03.2006
by which the appellate authority Metro Railway awarded a compensation of Rs.645731/- to the petitioner.
2. The petitioners case to put in brief is that the petitioner purchased the subject plot of land measuring about 4 cottahs from one of Sanjoy Mondal by
a registered sale deed dated 30th March, 1999 and since then the applicant is in physical possession thereon with his family by constructing 4 rooms, 1
bathroom, 1 tube-well in a habitable condition as yet.
3. On 28th March, 2002 the Metro Railway Authority issued a notification for the purpose of construction, alignment, addition and expansion of Metro
Railway from Tollygunge to New Garia being No.298 dated 28.03.2002.
4. Notification dated 9th June, 2002 was issued inviting any objection against the construction work of the Metro Railway under Section 7 (3) of the
Metro Railway (Construction of Works) Act, 1978.
5. Pursuant to the said notification the applicant submitted an objection on 26.06.2002 to the competent authority praying for exemption from
acquisition of the said plot of land. Thereafter the competent authority started a proceeding being case No.321 of 2002 and ultimately by an order
being No.6 dated 25.11.2002 rejected the objection and directed to file a claim case in due course for obtaining award for compensation.
6. Under Section10 (1) of the said Act the Central Government by Gazette Notification being No.208 dated 28.02.2003 published a declaration and
pursuant to the said Gazette notification the competent authority published a notice in daily newspaper on dated 29.03.2003 inviting all interested
parties to submit their claims of their acquired apportionment within 30 days of the declaration.
7. As per notification the applicant filed a compensation claim case being No.81 of 2003 to the competent authority within the stipulation wherein it has
been vividly stated that in 1999 the applicant had to pay Rs.140000 although D.S.R.O., Alipore assessed for the same as Rs.280000 for the stamp
duty. Thereafter the applicant had to spend huge amount of money to obtain the said plot of land in habitable condition .
8. The Opposite party Metro Railway discarded the plea of the applicant by filing the written objection that the subject land is already vested for the
construction of the Metro Railway and the market value of the said land has been fixed in terms of Clause 13 of the Metro Railway Construction of
Works Act, 1978. The market price of developed land in Mouja Brizi which is adjacent to Mouja Garagacha is Rs.2 to 2.5 lakhs per Cottah as supplied
by the District Registrar vide its Memo No. 1346 dated 18.09.2002. The value of developed land in Garagacha Mouja should be accepted as Rs.2
lakhs per Cottah.
9. A joint inspection team was administered by the competent authority of Metro Railway and subsequently a report was filed by the said team to the
said authority.
10. At the time of hearing, the opposite party Metro Railway did not adduce any oral evidence except to referring a Memo No.1489 dated 17.11.2003
of the District Registrar, South 24-Parganas wherein the valuation of Mouja Garagacha has been shown as Rs.1.25 lakhs per cottah. In the long run
the competent authority by his judgment awarded Rs.625731/- in total to the applicant.
11. The petitioner was not satisfied with the aforesaid order and being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order filed an appeal before the
appellate authority, Metro Railway, Kolkata, being appeal No.4 of 2006 under Section 13 (3) of the Said Act. The applicant tried to pursue the said
appellate authority by showing the valuation of neighbouring adjacent various Moujas. But after the conclusion of the appeal hearing the appellate
authority passed its order on 28.03.2006 by enhancement of award of Rs.20,000/- only. The petitioner never accepted the compensation amount till
date.
12. The anomalies and discrepancy in computation of the valuation of the said land by the competent authority is bad in the eye of law. Only District
Collector is entitled to assess the valuation of the land in question. Although the valuation of adjacent area has been assessed at the rate of
Rs.250000/- per cottah, by the District Registrar who is not the authority to compute the market price but only the stamp duty of his jurisdiction and it
is not the reflection of the market price upon which both the Tribunals have relied upon. The competent authority as well as the appellate authority
have relied upon the memo No.1489 dated 17.11.2003 which is gross injustice to the petitioner and being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order
and judgment passed by the appellate authority dated 28.03.2006 the petitioner preferred the instant application before the Hon’ble High Court,
Calcutta.
13. The Learned counsel representing the petitioner submitted that the present applicant is a street apparel Howkar and he has no abode except the
subject plot of land containing the construction. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the present applicant is not against the public welfare
work of Metro Railway but the computation must be done subject to proper assessment and computation of the marketable recent award. As such, it
is contended by the learned counsel that the order and judgment dated 28.03.2006 passed by the appellate authority Metro Railway, Kolkata should be
cancelled and / or set aside and the competent authority should be directed to initiate the proceeding afresh. The learned counsel drew the attention of
the court to Sections 24, 25 and 30 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013.
14. On the other hand the learned counsel representing the opposite party Metro Railway Kolkata submitted that in the instant case the land of the
petitioner along with vast area of the land has been acquisitioned by the competent authority Metro Railway for the construction of the Metro works
and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.625731/- in favour of the petitioner in a claim case for compensation filed at the instance of the
petitioner. The market value was assessed by the District Sub-Registrar as Rs.1.25 lacks per cottah. The petitioner having been aggrieved by and
dissatisfied with the said amount of compensation made an appeal before the appellate authority and the appellate authority considering all aspects
enhanced the said amount of compensation and awarded amount has been made to the extent of Rs.645731/- but the petitioner is not satisfied with the
said amount of compensation awarded by the competent authority and is now claiming more amount according to the higher valuation of the land
relating to the other Mouja as assessed by the District Registrar South 24-Parganas. But the petitioner’s land is situated at Gorgacha and is valued
lower amount an assessed by the self-same District Registrar.
15. The petitioner should accept the amount of compensation and hand over the possession of the land in favour of the opposite party in view of the
fact that the land has been acquired for the public purpose i.e. for greater interest of the Metro Railway works and as such he has got no right to
withhold of the possession of the land.
16. I have gone through the Memo No.1489 dated 17.11.2003 wherefrom it appears that the District Sub-Registrar â€" I South 24-Parganas furnish
the land valuation of the Moujas, Goragacha as Rs.1.25000/- per cottah, Chak Garia Rs.1.5000/- per cottah, Kalia Chak 1.5 lakh per cottah and Purba
Kutiari 1.5 lakh per cottah I have also perused the Memo No.1341 dated 16 09.2002 issued by the District Registrar South 24-Parganas wherein the
market value of the properties of 10 Moujas has been assessed by the District Registrar, South 24-Parganas.
17. Now the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the competent authority passed the aforesaid award of compensation to the tune of
Rs.625731 in favour of the petitioner vide its order and judgment dated 16.12.2006 in the acquisition claim case No.81 of 2003 i.e. long before the
enactment of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 and the appellate
authority had passed its order and judgment on 28.03.2006 but till date the petitioner has not delivered the possession in favour of the Metro Railway
Authority nor did he accept the amount of compensation. The concerned authority also did not deposit the aforesaid amount of awarded compensation
in the bank account of the petitioner till date which is in gross valuation of the provisions made Under Sections 24, 25 and 30 of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013. The land of the petitioner is situated at Gorgacha
and the valuation of the land is assessed by the District Registrar who is not the competent authority. It is the Collector who is the competent authority
to assess the market price of the acquisitioned land. Not only that from Memo No.1489 dated 17.11.2003 it appears that the land situated in adjacent
Moujas have been assessed by the District Registrar at a higher price particularly the land in Mouja brizi is assessed at Rs.2 to 2.5 lakhs per cottah.
Therefore the computation should be done by the competent authority afresh. Now let us have a look on the provisions enumerated under Sections 24,
25 and 30 of the said Act. Section 24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases. â€" (1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 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.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of
1894), where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical
possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the
appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such and acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act:
Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the
beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall been titled to
compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
Section 25. Period within which an award shall be made. â€" The Collector shall make an award within a period of twelve months from the date of
publication of the declaration under section 19 and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall
lapse. Provided that the appropriate Government shall have the power to extend the period of twelve months if in its opinion, circumstances exist
justifying the same:
Provided further that any such decision to extend the period shall be recorded in writing and the same shall be notified and be uploaded on the website
of the authority concerned.
Section 30. Award of solatium. â€" (1) The Collector having determined the total compensation to be paid, shall, to arrive at the final award, impose a
“Solatium†amount equivalent to one hundred per cent of the compensation amount.
Explanation. â€" For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that solatium amount shall be in addition to the compensation payable to any person
whose land has been acquired.
(2) The Collector shall issue individual awards detailing the particulars of compensation payable and the details of payment of the compensation as
specified in the First Schedule.
(3) In addition to the market value of the land provided under section 26, the Collector shall, in every case, award an amount calculated at the rate of
twelve per cent per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification of the Social
Impact Assessment study under sub-section (2) of section 4, in respect of such land, till the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking
possession of the land, whichever is earlier.
18. Having heard the submission of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel representing the Opposite Party Metro
Railway and also on perusal of the provisions made Under Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 I find that the award of compensation was passed by the appellate authority Metro Railway, Kolkata vide
its order and judgment on 28.03.2006 i.e. long before the enactment of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 and the amount of compensation has not been deposited to the bank account of the petitioner till date. The
petitioner also did not deliver the possession of the Land Acquisitioned by the Metro Railway Authority till this date. Therefore in view of the provision
made Under Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013 the
matter should be remanded back to the competent authority to initiate the proceeding afresh.
19. Accordingly the instant civil revisional application is allowed on contest. The judgment and order dated 28.03.2006 passed by the appellate
authority Metro Railway, Kolkata is hereby set aside and the entire matter is remanded back to the competent authority to initiate the proceeding of
computation of the amount of compensation in favour of the petitioner afresh in view of the provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2013.
20. There would be however, no order as to costs.
21. Urgent Photostat copies of the judgment be supplied to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of requisite formalities.
