J.N. Puri vs State Of Uttar Pradesh (Now Uttarakhand) & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

This writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 20.08.1996. Thereafter on 17.05.1999, a restoration application was filed by the petitioner for recalling the order dated 20.08.1996.

Subsequently, an objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that the restoration application has been filed with delay and the petitioner has not filed any delay condonation application. Thereafter, after a period of more than fourteen years i.e. 05.09.2013, a delay condonation application was filed by the petitioner.

The grounds shown in the delay condonation application appear to be just and bona fide. Delay Condonation Application is allowed, purely in the interest of justice and the delay is condoned.

For the reasons stated in the restoration application, the same is allowed. Order dated 20.08.1996 is recalled. Writ petition is restored to its original number.

This is an extremely old matter pertaining to the land acquisition proceedings under the old Land Acquisition Act i.e. the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (from hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). A notification under Section 4 of the Act was made by the State Government on 21.06.1979 notifying its intention to acquire certain area of land at Village Rangarhwala in Dehradun which is just behind the present Indian Military Academy. The beneficiary was the Indian Military Academy as the acquisition was for the expansion of the campus of the Indian Military Academy.

It is an admitted case that in these proceedings emergency clause under sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Act read with Section 5A of the Act have not been invoked and therefore affected parties were heard under Section 5A of the Act. Meanwhile, when all these proceedings were going on, an amendment was made in the Land Acquisition Act in the year 1984 which was effective from 24.09.1984, whereby the Collector had to make an award under Section 11 of the Act within a period of two years from the date of publication of its declaration (i.e. under Section 6 of the Act), and in case no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings of land acquisition would lapse.

However, in the present case, since by that time the amendment had come, the notification under Section 6 of the Act had already been made on 29.09.1980 and the two years period would have been calculated from 24.09.1984 and the award had to be made on or before 24.09.1986. Admittedly, in the present case, the Collector made its award on 23.09.1986. The Collector after making due enquiry has come to the conclusion that the land which has been acquired, a compensation of rupees eighteen lakh odd has to be given. However, since on the said land, the present petitioner i.e. the owner of the land had made certain constructions and he had given his house on rent to certain persons, the effective possession has not been taken as yet, and therefore, only 5/8 compensation of the entire award was released in favour of the owner i.e. the present petitioner and the remaining 3/8 compensation was to be given at the time the possession was given to the State Government.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is challenging the award before this Court in a writ petition saying that this cannot be called an award as it is not only conditional but these powers have not been given to the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Collector) as no duty is cast upon the petitioner to give possession and the powers to take a decision is solely of the Government under Section 9 of the Act and other provisions of the Act.

Initially, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad had granted an interim order in favour of the petitioner on 02.01.1987 and thereafter it was vacated on 14.05.1993. On 20.08.1996, this writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. A restoration application was filed when the matter was pending before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Meanwhile, the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 came into effect where the part of the area from the erstwhile State of U.P. was carved out into a new State i.e. the State of Uttarakhand. Since under the provisions of Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 all matters pertaining to the present territory of Uttarakhand were to be transferred to Uttarakhand High Court, this writ petition was transferred to this Court, in the year 2018.

It is an admitted case of both the parties that part of the compensation which is given has already been taken by the petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner has accepted the part amount but the same has been returned by him to the authority concerned. Moreover, the petitioner had also moved an application before the Special Land Acquisition Officer who has referred the matter under Section 18 of the Act and the matter is presently pending before the District Judge, Dehradun.

In view of this admitted position, no determination as to whether the award is valid or invalid can be made by this Court as it is the sole jurisdiction of the District Judge under Section 18 of the Act. This is so as the order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer/Collector is an administrative order or at best a quasi judicial order. It is not purely a judicial order. Even if the contention of the petitioner is held to be prima facie correct (though there is no determination by this Court on this aspect), this has still to be examined by the court i.e. the court of learned District Judge, Dehradun. Therefore, if there is any kind of invalidity attached to the award as alleged that itself will not make the reference invalid. There is no invalidity with the reference. Let the reference court decide it in accordance with law.

In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed.