KRISHNABAI Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these set of petitions the petitioners have sought to direct the 1st respondent to grant statutory benefits including interest of 12%, 9% and 15% on the solatium on awarded amount under Sections 23, 23 (1-A) and Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'); for further direction to the respondents to grant all other benefits for which they are entitled under the Act and to refer the matter to the Civil Court for higher compensation under Section 18 of the act.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners their properties were acquired by the Government for the construction of the Almatti dam by issuing preliminary notification under Section 4 (1) dated 2. 12. 83 and final notification under Section 6 on 31. 6. 96; the land Acquisition Officer having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and out of urgency entered into an agreement and finalized the acquisition and agreed to pay compensation amount to the petitioners and others whose landed property was acquired and of course at the time of settlement the following conditions were said to be inserted (i) Land owners should invest 50% of compensation in N. S. C and to take the balance 50% in cash; (ii) They should forego 30% solatium under Land Acquisition Act; and (iii) They should not approach the Court for enhancement of compensation on any ground whatsoever. Accordingly, as per the above conditions, there was said to be a consent award passed in all these cases. Although the Land Acquisition Officer has not awarded solatium of 30% or the interest on the amount as contemplated under Section 23 and 23 (1-A) and Sub-section 34 of the Act in view of the agreement, but subsequently petitioners said to have made applications to the government stating that they are entitled for all the benefits on the agreed amount of compensation. After prolonged deliberations, on the direction of the Government the Land acquisition Officer has granted 30% solatium on the award amount in the year 1993 by Award dated 15. 7. 03 of which the annexures are annexed to the Writ Petitions; although the solatium amount of 30% has been granted no interest has been granted as contemplated under Section 23 and 23 (1-A) of the Act and also no statutory benefits having been granted to the petitioners and others. Thereafter, after payment of solatium amount of 30% petitioners and others have made several representations to the respondents to pay all the statutory benefits as contemplated under section 23 and 23 (1-A) and also under Section 34 of the Act. Hence these petitions.

(3.) ON behalf of the respondent authorities statement of objection has been filed. While questioning the maintainability of the Writ Petitions it is submitted that the award has been passed with the agreement of the petitioners, that if the petitioners were not agreeable to the conditions imposed on them, consent award would not have been passed. As per the agreed terms, the petitioners were not entitled for 30% Solatium at the time when the original award was passed in 1989. Further, it is submitted that the possession of acquired properties has not been taken, after the pronouncement of the award as per Section 16 (2) of the Act. Hence, they are not liable to pay interest but the petitioners have received 30% solatium and 12% additional market value as per provisions of Section 23 and 23 (1-A) of the Act. As such the petitioners are not entitled for interest in view of the ruling of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 5642 of 1998 dated 7. 9. 1999 and also indicating the amount of compensation awarded in each case, it is submitted that the petitioners have been paid 30% of solatium and 12% of the Additional Market value from the date of 4 (1) notification. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petitions.