RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE Vs. STATE OF W B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals being F. A 35/67 and F. As. 503 to 505/67 are by the Land Acquisition Judge. Calcutta 24 Parganas in L. D. P. Cases Nos. 90, 94 and 95 of 1962 allowing in part on contest with costs. The award made by the Collector was revised in accordance with the findings arrived at in the aforesaid judgment. There was a direction for payment of statutory compensation at the rate of 15% in each case and interest was allowed at the rate of 6% from the date" of possession till payment of the awarded sum in each of these cases. The subject-matter of these appeals was in respect of the determination of the market price of the lands comprising of C. S. plots Nos. 90 and 90/434 and plot No. 219 in Mouza Naktolla, P. S. Tollygunge, district 24 Parganas which was notified for acquisition under S.4 of the Land Development and Planning Act on 19th October, 1950 and simultaneously on the said date a declaration was also made and thereafter possession of the said plots of land was taken. However, in view of the decision that simultaneous publication of the notification under S.4 and the declaration under S.6 was illegal the subsequent notification under S.4 was published on 30th October, 1956 and thereafter declaration was made under S.6 though of course possession, that was taken on the basis of the earlier notification made under S.4 in 1950, was retained and the possession which was on the basis of the earlier notification made under S.4 in 1950, was retained and the possession which was taken on 19th February, 1950 was not however restored to the parties even though the earlier notification was superseded by subsequent notification under S.4 being published on 30th October 1956. The learned Land Acquisition Judge in his judgment held that though the lands were notified for acquisition under S.4 of the Land Development and Planning Act on October 1956, still in view of the provision of S.8(1)(b), 2nd proviso, the market price of the lands would be determined on the basis of the price prevailing as on 31st December, 1946 as the said acquisition has been made for the purpose of settlement of immigrants under the provision of S.2(1)(b) of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act.

(2.) Mr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has questioned this finding of the learned Land Acquisition Judge on the ground that this finding is wholly erroneous in view of the decision of this Court reported in 79 Cal WN 593 (R. N. Nandi v. State of West Bengal) where it was held that the second para of Cl.(b) of proviso to S.8 (1) of L. D. P. Act. 1948 having made a differential treatment to the owners of land is unconstitutional and as such in making the award the Special Land Acquisition Judge ought to have determined the market price of the land on the date of the issuance of the notification published under S.4 of the L. D. P. Act which has been done in this case on 30th October, 1956. Mr. Mukherjee, therefore, prayed that this is a fit case which should be sent down to the learned Judge below for fresh determination of the market price of the aforesaid lands acquired under the provision of the said Act on the basis of the price prevailing on the date of the publication of the said notification, that is 30th October, 1956.

(3.) Mr. Das has also appeared on behalf of the State, appellant in F. As. 503 to 505 of 1967.