STATE OF M P Vs. SHOBHA BAI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RThe appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 7-8-2008 passed in W. P. No. 245/08 (Shobha Bai Singh and another Vs. State of M. P. and others), allowing the petition filed by the present respondents, are before this Court with a submission that the order passed by the learned Single Judge runs contrary to the provision of Section 23 (1-A) and Section 34 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act' ).

(2.) THE material facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that the notification under Section 4 for acquisition of the land of the petitioners was published on 29-10-1969. A declaration under Section 6 was made and ultimately the award passed on 25-11-1985. It was directed that particular amount be paid to the petitioners and land in lieu of the land be also given to the original petitioners. On 6-2-2003 a supplementary award was made determining the amount of compensation for trees, solatium at the rate of 30% and compensation under Section 23 (1- A) of the Act from the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act up to the date of award. Against the award dated 6-2-2003 the present appellants filed an appeal before the Collector under Section 17 of the Indian Forest Act, which was dismissed on 8-8-2003, the revision filed against the same also came to be dismissed by Revisional Authority on 14-2-2005. Thereafter an application under Section 18 (1) read with Section 13 (A) of the Act was filed. The application was dismissed. A writ petition bearing W. P. No. 630/06 challenging the said order was filed, which also was dismissed on 3-5-2008.

(3.) AS the petitioners were not paid their dues, they came to this Court in W. P. No. 4708/04, which was finally disposed of on 19-4-2005 with a direction to the respondents to implement the orders of the Revisional Authority. In pursuance to the said direction the petitioners were paid compensation of rs. 9,75,131/- and Rs. 21,73,351/- on 13-8-2004 and 11-9-2006 respectively. As the petitioners were not paid the interest under Section 34 of the Act, they filed contempt Petition No. 3864/05, which was disposed of by this Court on 27-9-2006 observing that in absence of direction for payment of interest under section 34, non-compliance would not lead to any contempt on the part of the present appellants.