SAMRAJYALAKSHMI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case, mandamus is sought for directing the Land Acquisition Officer, the 2nd respondent herein, to pass an award determining tht compensation on the basis of the report submitted by him on 15-5-1986.

(2.) The case in short is that the land of the petitioners comprising as 5.30 cents was acquired by publishing a notification u/i 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act' for short) on 15-11-1977 which w is challanged successfully by filing a writ petition which was allowed by quashing the notification on some technical grounds. Later, however, again a notification u/s 4(1) of the Act was published on 28-2-1986 for acquisition of the said land for the ourpose of house sites to weaker sections. Thereafter W. P. No : 9524/86 was filed seeking directions to finalise the award proceedings and pay the compensation immediately. The further averment in the affidavit is that the 2nd respondent inspected the land on 15-5-1986 and a sketch of the area has been prepared on which 20 transactions of sale that took place between 7-2-83 and 17-2-1986 were noted coupled with the prices at which those transactions have taken place and ultimately based on the same, the 2nd respondent fixed the value of the land acquired herein at Rs. 2,87,000/- per acre. Thereafter on the basis of the report prepared, a letter also was addressed by the District Collector concerned, the 1st respondent herein, to the Director of Tribal Welfare, requesting him to release a sum of Rs. 20,49,933-00 towards compensation. W hile so, the State Government appears to have requested the authorities to consider the feasibility of shifting the beneficiaries elsewhere, so that the compensation may work out to lesser amount than the one now sought for. The Joint Collector concerned, the 3rd respondent herein, after inspecting the the land came to the conclusion that that beneficiaries have all constructed pucca houses and they cannot be shifted elsewhere, but however concluded that compensation may be paid at the rate of Rs- 60,000/- per acre instead of Rs. 2,87,000/- per acre. The report submitted by 2nd respondent on 15-5-1936 has been countersigned by the 3rd respondent on the preliminary valuation statement and thereafter the District Collector concerned sought the release of the amount. It it at that stage, the 3rd respondent insisted that the compensation should be worked out at the rate suggested by him. It is that suggestion that it sought to be assailed stating that the 3rd respondent has no power or jurisdiction to do so.

(3.) In the counter filed by the Joint Collector, the 3rd responden therein, it is averred inter alia that the Deputy Director of Social Welfare, after his personal inspection of the lands, preliminarily proposed the market value of the land after taking into consideration the 20 sales transate0d in the vicinity of the land. The extents of the lands covered by the sales are small. These are covering 0-02 cents and 0-09 cents and so forth and, therefore, the same yard stick cannot be extended to larger area of ac 5.30 cents. The 3rd respondent inspected the land under acquisition and the lands covered by the sales and fixed the value of the land under acquisition at Rs. 60,000/- per acre. As the value of the land exceeds Rs. 50,000/- per acre, the Government were addressed seeking permission for acquisition. The Government in its memo dt. 29-9-1986 permitted the District Collector to acquire the land at a cost of Rs. 6000/- per acre. Thereafter, Award No : 7/86 was passed on 3-10-1986. In case the land owners are aggrieved, they can as well have a resort to sec, 18 of the Act for getting the compensation enhanced by the Civil Court on reference. The Joint Collector has power to inspect in all cases where the total market value of the land in each case exceeds Rs. 50,000/- and the preliminary valuation statement has to be countersigned by the Joint Collector before the awards are passed. The District Social Welfare Officer, while submitting the preliminary valuation report after making inspection on 15-5-1986, has not taken into account certain sales in S. No : 115. As per G.O.Ms. No. 1843 dt. 13-12-1984, the Collector, the Joint Collectors and the Special Collectors dealing with land acquisition matters have right to accord approval to the award for payment of compensation. Therefore, the 3r.l respodent has inspected the land and suggested fixation of Rs, 60,000/- per acre fixing the same under the aforesaid G. O.