RAMESHWAR DAYAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two connected appeals raise identical questions and as such are being decided by a common judgment. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued on 20-7-1965 for acquiring a large tract of land situate in certain villages of tahsil Ghaziabad, as it then was, district of Meerut at the instance of M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd., Modinagar, for construction of a new factory for the manufacture of Nylon and other synthetic fibers and of dwelling houses for the employees. The land specified in the notification under Section 4 included plots of land belonging to Rameshwar Dayal and others who are the appellants in First Appeal No. 223 of 1974 and Niranjan Singh and others who are the appellants in First Appeal No. 292 of 1974. The Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 14-7-1967 determined compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per sq. yard. The appellants felt aggrieved by this award. At the instance of Rameshwar Dayal and others Reference No. 153 of 1969 and at the instance of Niranjan Singh and others Reference No. 149 of 1969 were made by the Collector, Meerut to the District Judge, Meerut. The appellants claimed compensation before the District Judge at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. yard. These references were decided by the Additional District Judge, Meerut, by two separate awards each dated 29-9-1970 whereby the compensation was determined at the rate of Rs. 2.50 per sq. yard. Feeling dissatisfied Rameshwar Dayal and others have preferred First Appeal No. 223 of 1974 and Niranjan Singh and others have preferred First Appeal No. 292 of 1974 in this Court. In these appeals the appellants have confined their claim of compensation at the rate of Rs. 5/- per sq. yard.

(2.) During the course of arguments counsel for the appellants has made two submissions in support of these appeals :

(3.) We shall deal with the second submission first. In regard to this submission it has been pointed out by counsel for the respondents that in the State of Uttar Pradesh Section 23(2) of the Act which provides for payment of solatium was deleted w.e.f. 19-11-1954 by U. P. Act No. 22 of 1954 and was reinserted w.e.f. 3-7-1972 by U. P. Act No. 28 of 1972 and on its basis it has been urged that since the notification under Section 4 of the Act had been issued on 20-7-1965 and since the reinsertion of Section 23(2) of the Act by U. P. Act No. 28 of 1972 was not retrospective the appellants were not entitled to any solatium. Reliance in support of this submission has been placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in State of U. P. v. Khairunnisa Begum, AIR 1983 All 320. It has also been urged that the amendment made in the Act by the Amending Act of 1984 was also not applicable to the facts of the instant cases inasmuch as the award both by the Land Acquisition Officer and the Additional District Judge were given before 30-4-1982 and these appeals are not directed against an award given after 30-4-1982. Reliance in support of this submission has been placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in K. Kamalajammanniavaru v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, AIR 1985 SC 576.