AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned Advocate General has submitted that supplementary affidavit dated 1.9.2012 in response to the order of this Court dated 6.8.2012 has been filed in this case and has intimated that the National Law University (NUSRL, Ranchi) has already incurred the cost for construction of the boundary wall of the University to the tune of Rs. 2.25 Crores, out of which, Rs. 1.5 crores has been paid and the rest of the amount is in the process of the payment against the total proposed cost of the boundary wall of Rs. 2.36 Crores. The Indian Institute of Management, Ranchi, also has informed the Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi vide letter dated 31.8.2012 that the estimated cost of the construction of the boundary wall of their premises is Rs. 2,53,19,000/- and already Rs. 1.7 Crores has also been spent. However, no expenditure has been incurred in respect of the IIIT, Ranchi as no allotment land has been made in its favour till now. The details of the per acre crop in the Nagri Village has been given and the concerned Anchal Adhikari has informed that the average production of the rice in the Nagri Village is eight quintals per acre. In the Nagri Village, 2 per cent of the land is irrigated by well. At the time of acquisition of the land, there was 150 raiyats and due to the expansion in the family for the last about more than 50 years, now the total persons may be 430.
Some of the students of the National Law University has submitted an Intervention Application.
We have considered the research done by these students and they placed on record of their research work which indicate very valuable data with respect to the people, particularly in the Kanke area including Nagri, their educational, their total agricultural production and according to these intervenors, in view of the data available, it appears that the total rice production gives the rice of 1.98 grams per person per day against minimum requirements of 480 grams per day. They submitted that it is impossible that the persons who are claiming themselves to be total dependent upon the agriculture are in fact dependent upon the agricultural produce only looking to the total agricultural produce in the area particularly on the land which is acquired by the then Bihar Government. However, in view of the research made by the intervenors, the intervention application (I.A. No. 2641 of 2012) for impleading them as party-intervenor is allowed.
We may recapitulate that the writ petition was filed because of the reason of obstruction in the construction of the building of the National Law University, Ranchi and the facts came to the knowledge of this Court that there are other Institutions whose constructions are also affected because of the resistance by some persons, and therefore, in the public interest litigation, the scope was expanded and orders were passed also for the Indian Institute of Management and IIIT, Ranchi. However, in view of the statement of State, we are confining this petition only to the National Law University Ranchi and the Indian Institute of Management, Ranchi who have started construction of the boundary wall and already incurred Rs. 2.25 crores by the National Law University and Rs. 1.75 Crores by the IIIT, Ranchi.
We may also recapitulate that this Court as back as on 30.4.2012 issued directions to the respondent-State to secure the construction of the buildings of the above institutions which should be started within 48 hours. Thereafter, some of the raiyats submitted applications questioning the land acquisition of the year 1956-57 and that I.A. No. 1558 of 2012 was dismissed by this Court vide detailed order dated 16.5.2012. Against this order, a SLP being SLP No. 18622 of 2012 was preferred by those applicants of the said I.A. and the same was also dismissed by the Hon''ble Supreme Court vide order dated 28.6.2012 holding that in a matter of land acquisition of 1956-57, the Supreme Court was not inclined to interfere in the orders passed by this Court dated 16.5.2012.
However, in the public interest, in spite of the said orders, passed by this Court and by the Supreme Court, the State Government was directed to have the dialogue with the raiyats of that time and in response to that, a Committee was constituted by the Government. Again and again, time was sought for producing the report of the committee by the State Government and during this period, some untoward incidence occurred because of the provocation of the illiterate persons by the persons who are according to the learned Advocate General entered into this controversy for their political and vested interest.
Be that as it may, we are not on that issue in any manner because of the plain and simple reason that the land was acquired by the State Government which is run by the elected representatives of the public. There is Land Acquisition Act which is not dependent upon the wishes of the persons whose land is sought to be acquired, when the land was acquired and complete procedure was followed. The land vest in the Government which does not depend upon the non acceptance of payment by any person. The land acquisition proceeding was not challenged in the last more than 50 years, but to see that the general public may not feel deprived of their hearing, therefore, this Court directed the Government to have the dialogues with the concerned persons only. However, in spite of the meetings when no concrete result came, this Court again passed a detail order asking the Government to answer the question mentioned in the order dated 16.7.2012 and then again queries were raised which have been answered by the State.
Today learned Advocate General submitted that three weeks more time may be granted so that the Government may reach to an amicable solution as a last chance.
However, we may observe here that the University has its curriculum and the University can admit the students according to the availability of the infrastructure with it and the University has already admitted the third Batch of the students. The University has already paid Rs. 75,57,192/- as only rent from the December 2010, for some facilities, up to June of 2012 only. The recurring expenditure of this amount is a heavy burden upon the students who have come to study in the State of Jharkhand from the entire country. If the construction of the building will not start in time, the University either may have to stop the admission of the students or may have to incur more expenditure than the rent already paid by the University.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has serious objection in giving any time to the State. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant any time to the State Government beyond the period of two weeks from today.
We are making it clear that the matter is not being taken up by this Court only for the purpose of satisfying those persons who do not want to satisfy themselves at the instigation of others or because of their lack of knowledge. We have raised this issue only because of the reason of involvement of the other persons who have projected as though that in the entire State of Jharkhand, if this land will be made available for these three institutions, there will be no agricultural land in the State of Jharkhand. We are not waiting for any bargain, but making it clear that the rule of law will prevail at any cost. The time was given only for the purpose of making the public understand the realities. Since, it is a public interest litigation, therefore, any order passed and is being passed in the knowledge of the persons concerned who have already taken part in the various meetings convened by the State Government is binding upon all whether they are specifically party in this petition or not.
In view of the above reasons, whatever the result with respect to the compensation or their enhancement is taken by the State Government, the State Government may take the decision and so far as the construction is concerned that must be cleared by the State Government in the administrative side within two weeks from today so that actual construction of the building of at least National Law University may start which has to give the admission to the students in time which can be done provided that it will have its own hostel and other infrastructure. Therefore, the University is free to raise the construction from 25th September, 2012, and all the State authorities are directed to secure the complete construction activities on the land in question.
Put up this case on 3rd October, 2012. Copy of this order may be given to the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State Government.